Burbank City Council
January 14, 2025

ATTACHMENT 1
City of Burbank
City Parks Master Plan
2024
Prepared for:

Prepared by:

Photo by City of Burbank
Acknowledgments
City Council
Nick Schultz, Mayor
Nikki Perez, Vice Mayor
Konstantine Anthony, Council Member
Zizette Mullens, Council Member
Tamala Takahashi, Council Member
City Manager’s Office
Justin Hess, City Manager
Courtney Padgett, Assistant City Manager
Parks, Recreation, and Community Services Board
Michael DePalo, Board Member
Ara Messerlian, Board Member
Myeisha Peguero Gamiño, Board Member
Ashley Ramsey, Board Member
Robert Brodie, Board Member
Burbank Cultural Arts Commission
Anet Abnous, Commissioner
Jacqueline Brenneman, Commissioner
Eric Conner, Commissioner
Stefanie Girard, Commissioner
Leah Harrison, Commissioner
Monica Moye, Commissioner
Cynthia Pease, Commissioner
Katherine Zoraster, Commissioner
Parks and Recreation Department
Marisa Garcia, Park, Recreation, and Community Services Director Diego Cevallos, Assistant Director of Park, Recreation, and Community Services Kristen Smith, Assistant Director of Park, Recreation, and Community Services Michael Del Campo, Assistant Director of Park, Recreation, and Community Services Graciela Coronado, Assistant Director of Park, Recreation, and Community Services Tony Rodriguez, Graphics Media Designer
Lorena Romero, Administrative Analyst I
Public Works Department
Ken Berkman, Public Works Director
Planning Team
Zachary Mueting, Principal Landscape Architect, RJM Design Group Inc.

Kristen Schnell, Project Manager, RJM Design Group Inc.

Courtney Hawkins, Landscape Designer, RJM Design Group Inc.

Amy Leos, GIS Analyst, RJM Design Group Inc.

David Molina, GIS Analyst, RJM Design Group Inc.

Ed Crofts, Senior Associate, RJM Design Group Inc.

Adam Probolsky, Survey Specialist, Probolsky Research
Special thank you to our stakeholders and community members who participated in the planning process.

Photo by City of Burbank

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section ONE: INTRODUCTION

1.1 Purpose of City Parks Master Plan ........................................4

1.2 Benefits of Parks and Recreation .........................................5

1.3 Master Plan Process ...............................................................7

1.4 Regional Setting ...................................................................10

1.5 Local Setting .........................................................................11

1.6 Related Studies ....................................................................13 Section TWO: COMMUNITY VOICE

2.1 Community Profile ...............................................................18

2.2 Community Outreach and Engagement .........................21

2.3 Summarizing the Community Voice ..................................38 Section THREE: NEEDS ASSESSMENT

3.1 Parks, Facilities, and Trails
City Parks ..............................................................................43 Recreation Facilities ............................................................44 Trail Connectivity .................................................................46

3.2 Programs and Services ........................................................47

3.3 Acreage Analysis .................................................................49

3.4 Park Service Area Gap Analysis .........................................53

3.5 Local Trends Analysis ...........................................................57

3.6 Custom Park Standards Calculations ................................61

3.7 School Facilities ....................................................................67

3.8 Other Parks and Recreation Facilities ...............................69

Section FOUR: RECOMMENDATIONS

4.1 Key Strategies .......................................................................74

4.2 Park / Recreation Facility Funding Recommendations ..95

4.3 Short, Mid, and Long-Term Costs .....................................101

4.4 Maintenance and Staffing Recommendations .............105 Executive Summary ...................................................................................1

LIST OF EXHIBITS
Section ONE: INTRODUCTION

1.3-1 Project Timeline .........................................................................................................7

1.4-1 Regional Setting .....................................................................................................10

1.5-1 Local Setting ...........................................................................................................12

Section TWO: COMMUNITY VOICE

2.1-1 Tapestry LifeMode Map .........................................................................................17

2.1-2 Burbank Age Profile Compared to Los Angeles County ...................................19

2.1-3 Community Profile ..................................................................................................20

2.2-1 Multimodal Survey Response Distribution Map ...................................................27

2.2-2 Workshop #1 Survey Response Distribution Map ................................................29

2.2-3 Workshop #2 Survey Response Distribution Map ................................................31

2.2-4 Workshop #3 Survey Response Distribution Map ................................................33

2.2-5 Feedback Survey Response Distribution Map.....................................................35

2.3-1 Program Priorities ....................................................................................................39

2.3-2 Facility Priorities .......................................................................................................40

Section THREE: NEEDS ASSESSMENT

3.1-1 City Parks Map ........................................................................................................43

3.1-2 Recreation Facilities Map ......................................................................................44

3.1-3 Existing Bike and Pedestrian Trails Map ................................................................46

3.4-1 Service Area Gap Analysis for Pocket Parks .......................................................53

3.4-2 Service Area Gap Analysis for Neighborhood Parks ..........................................54

3.4-3 Service Area Gap Analysis for Community Parks ...............................................54

3.4-4 Park Service Area Gap Analysis Map ..................................................................55

3.5-1 Average Distance Traveled for Pocket Parks .....................................................58

3.5-2 Average Distance Traveled for Neighborhood Parks ........................................58

3.5-3 Average Distance Traveled for Community Parks .............................................59

3.5-4 Average Distance Traveled for Regional Parks ..................................................59

3.5-5 Average Distance Traveled for All Parks ..............................................................60

3.6-1 CPSC Methodology for Sports Organizations .....................................................62

3.6-2 Local Needs vs. NRPA Needs ................................................................................62

3.7-3 School Facilities Map .............................................................................................67

Section FOUR: RECOMMENDATIONS

4.1-1 Soccer Fields Survey Results ..................................................................................75

4.1-2 Pickleball Courts Survey Results ............................................................................76

4.1-3 Youth Sports Survey Results ....................................................................................77

4.1-4 Pool Improvements/Swimming/Competitive Swim Survey Results ...................79

4.1-5 Splash Pad Survey Results ......................................................................................80

4.1-6 Park Maintenance Survey Results .........................................................................81

4.1-7 Sustainable Park Management Survey Results ...................................................82

4.1-8 Restrooms Survey Results .......................................................................................83

4.1-9 Playground Improvements Survey Results ...........................................................84

4.1-10 Accessible Playgrounds and Facilities Survey Results ........................................85

4.1-11 Dog Park Survey Results .........................................................................................86

4.1-12 Add More Parks and Green Areas Survey Results ..............................................87

4.1-13 Walking Paths or Trails Survey Results ...................................................................88

4.1-14 Bike Trails Survey Results .........................................................................................89

4.1-15 Parking and Transportation Survey Results ..........................................................90

4.1-16 Performance Venue Survey Results......................................................................91

4.1-17 Arts and Culture Programs Survey Results ...........................................................92

4.1-18 More Senior Programs and Activities Survey Results...........................................93

4.1-19 Day Camps Survey Results ....................................................................................94

4.2-1 Parks and Recreation Facility Projects .................................................................97

4.3-1 Short, Mid, and Long-Term Costs ........................................................................101 1 2
3 4
Photo by RJM Design Group

APPENDIX TABLE OF CONTENTS (SEPARATE DOCUMENT)
Tool 1: Meetings ....................................................................................................................5 Tool 2: Existing Documentation .........................................................................................15 a. Information Request Memo – Existing Document Resources ............................15 b. Zoning Map .............................................................................................................18 c. Existing Trails Map ...................................................................................................19 Tool 3: Inventory of Recreation Facilities, Parks, & Programs .........................................20 a. Map of Existing Parks ..............................................................................................20 b. Map of Existing Recreation Facilities ....................................................................21 c. Park Amenity Matrix ...............................................................................................22 d. Park Profiles ..............................................................................................................23 e. Facility Profiles ......................................................................................................... 51 f. Schools Map ............................................................................................................69 g. Assessment and Inventory of Programs and Services ........................................71 Tool 4: Demographic Assessment ...................................................................................102 Tool 5: Local Trends Analysis ...........................................................................................107 Tool 6: Custom Park Standards Calculations (CPSCs) .................................................. 112 Tool 7: Community Engagement .................................................................................... 117 a. Project Website .....................................................................................................117 b. Feedback Comments Summary ........................................................................134 c. Stakeholder Interview Summary .........................................................................148 d. City Staff Focus Group Summary ........................................................................152 e. Community Workshop #1 Summary ...................................................................165 f. Community Workshop #2 Summary ...................................................................171 g. Community Workshop #3 Summary ...................................................................177 h. Statistically Valid Multimodal Survey ..................................................................185 i. Facility and Program Needs Summary Charts ..................................................211 Tool 8: Community Needs Assessment .......................................................................... 213 a. Facility and Program Needs Summary Prioritization .........................................213 b. Park Acreage Analysis .........................................................................................215 c. Service Gap Analysis ............................................................................................218 Tool 9: Recommendations ...............................................................................................222 Tool 10: Operations and Maintenance Plan ..................................................................224 Tool 11: Policy Review & General Plan Updates ............................................................250 Tool 12: Financial Strategy Plan ...................................................................................... 254 Tool 13: Final Presentation ............................................................................................... 280

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Burbank City Parks Master Plan will serve as a guide and implementation tool for the management and development of parks and recreation facilities throughout the City. This document represents a summary of the community outreach, research, and professional analysis conducted. The culminating result is a community inspired plan for the future of parks and recreation in the City of Burbank.

The process began with a review of pertinent planning documents, existing park resources, and recreation opportunities. Following the initial inventory, a community outreach campaign was developed. In-person workshops, online video presentations, one-on-one stakeholder interviews, a statistically-valid multimodal survey, public online surveys, and direct website feedback surveys were conducted to analyze the community recreation demand in the City. Throughout the process, project updates and summary results were posted to the project website. This website enabled community members to review updates and provide immediate feedback at any point during the project. This resource allowed anyone in the community to have a voice in the process regardless of when and where meetings were held.

The Master Plan includes capital improvements of $200,224,405 ($45,545,744 in planned total project costs and $154,678,661 of additional Master Plan recommended projects).

Based on the findings, this Master Plan outlines key park and facility improvements as well as maintenance recommendations identified in Section Four. Detailed reports of these analysis are available in the appendix. The following are key strategies developed to balance the available inventory with the community’s recreational desires.

The following recommended key strategies are designed to balance the equation of where existing recreation resources exist and how they relate to the needs of the community.

Through implementation of these key strategies and goals, recreation can flourish and will continue to support a thriving active and healthy community.

Key Strategy #1: Develop multi-use sports complexes that maximize space efficiency, provide flexible scheduling, and promote inclusive programming for all age groups.

Goal 1.1: The City should prioritize developing soccer fields to meet community needs, as use of school district fields are unsecured and contingent to school priorities.

Goal 1.2: The City should develop additional pickleball courts in groupings of 4-8, allowing flexibility for lessons, scheduling, and tournament play.

Goal 1.3: Expand youth sports offerings, particularly in high-demand areas like baseball, volleyball, and soccer, by developing new facilities and collaborating with programs to meet community needs.

Key Strategy #2: Implement aquatic center improvements with diverse water features, swim programs, and spaces for both competitive athletes and casual swimmers.

Goal 2.1: Collaborate with local providers to address participation barriers, capacity, and explore expanded use of McCambridge Pool.

Goal 2.2: Add small, low-cost water features that enhance playgrounds with mist-level play, avoiding standing water and minimizing impact on park usability. 1 | City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan
Photo by RJM Design Group
Key Strategy #3: Adopt a comprehensive park enhancement plan that prioritizes eco- friendly practices, modernizes amenities, and ensures inclusive access for all community members, including those with disabilities.

Goal 3.1: Improve park maintenance by focusing on sports fields, hardscape areas, and planter areas, while utilizing computer maintenance management software (CMMS) for scheduled and planned tasks to support a lifecycle management program of park assets.

Goal 3.2: Promote sustainable park management by developing an Urban Forest Master Plan encouraging park conservation, implementing a lifecycle management plan for tree care, and partnering with community organizations to promote urban forest health.

Goal 3.3: Increase restroom maintenance and availability through additional cleaning operations during peak usage times in parks with high visitation.

Goal 3.4: Continue the playground renovation schedule, while incorporating universal playground design standards for equitable and inclusive play spaces in all new developments.

Goal 3.5: Enhance park accessibility with inclusive playgrounds, accessible facilities, and universal design standards to create equitable spaces for all ages and abilities.

Goal 3.6: The City should prioritize the continued development of the Dick Clark Dog Park.

Key Strategy #4: Create interconnected greenways with walking loops that link parks and trails to accessible transit options and parking, promoting sustainable mobility and outdoor recreation.

Goal 4.1: Enhance urban spaces by repurposing land, developing green corridors, and fostering public-private partnerships to create multiuse recreational and environmental spaces.

Goal 4.2: Enhance park access and promote healthy living through a well defined trail system.

Goal 4.3: Improve communication on trail access, gather community feedback, and advance the Burbank Complete Streets Plan to boost bike and pedestrian mobility.

Goal 4.4: Enhance pedestrian safety by adding traffic calming, improving parking flow, and ensuring adequate parking and alternative transport for parks and events.

Key Strategy #5: Create a versatile cultural hub that offers adaptable spaces for performances, exhibitions, and community-driven programs, fostering creative expression and cultural engagement.

Goal 5.1: Strengthen partnerships with local nonprofits and enhance facilities like the Burbank Little Theater and Starlight Bowl, providing diverse platforms for arts and cultural events.

Goal 5.2: Expand access to the arts through fostering expanded cultural programs and development of facilities / venue optimization.

Key Strategy #6: Expand diverse programming that provides tailored activities for both seniors and youth, encouraging active engagement and community growth.

Goal 6.1: Foster community and well-being by expanding social clubs, fitness options, and creative arts programs for seniors.

Goal 6.2: Provide flexible day camps with options for working parents through full-day, half- day, and school-partnered camps.

City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan | 2
Photo by RJM Design Group
3 | City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan
1 Purpose of a City Parks Master Plan
The City of Burbank has numerous parks and recreation opportunities available for its community members. Through these parks and recreation facilities, people can exercise, socialize, and connect with nature. The mission statement of the Burbank Parks and Recreation Department reflects a commitment to being a central and vital part of the community. The three key components that contribute to the department’s goal of enriching the lives of community members include dedicated people, beautiful parks, and inspiring programs.

Mission Statement
Together we strive to be the heart of the community by providing enriching opportunities through dedicated people, beautiful parks, and inspiring programs. -Burbank Parks and Recreation Department Mission Statement The community outreach process provides a clear understanding of the community’s desires and needs for parks and recreation. Having this understanding enables strategic expenditures and improvements within the recreation system and maximizes the community impact. This report was developed in part to ensure the resources dedicated to sustaining recreation in Burbank are continuously in line with community expectations and desires.

The Master Plan presented here is intended to be flexible and should be evaluated and/ or modified every five (5) years as the City responds to unforeseen opportunities and constraints, as well as changes in residents’ needs and demands in the context of other city priorities.

1.1 Verdugo Park
Photo by City of Burbank
SECTION ONE:

INTRODUCTION
City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan | 4
Benefits of Parks and Recreation
The California Park and Recreation Society (CPRS) Vision Insight and Planning Project - Creating Community in the 21st Century identifies the mission of California’s park and recreation agencies:
“To create community through people, parks and programs.” The CPRS VISION also identifies benefits of park and recreation services including:
• Foster Human Development. Parks and recreation services foster social, intellectual, physical, and emotional development.
• Promote Health and Wellness. Participation in recreation improves physical and emotional health.
• Increase Cultural Unity. Parks and recreation increase cultural unity through experiences that promote cultural understanding and celebrate diversity. • Facilitate Community Problem-Solving. Park and recreation professionals have skills in facilitation and leadership that can be applied to resolve community problems and issues.
• Protect Natural Resources. By acquiring and protecting valuable resources as open space, such as rivers, streams, greenways, viewsheds, forests, and other habitat areas, natural resources are protected and habitat required for the survival of diverse species is preserved.
• Strengthen Safety and Security. Park and recreation professionals provide safe environments for recreation and design programs and services specifically to reduce criminal activity.
• Strengthen Community Image and Sense of Place. Parks, recreation facilities, programs, and community events are key factors in strengthening community image and creating a sense of place.
• Support Economic Development. Recreation programs and facilities attract and retain businesses and residents, as well as attract tourists. Parks and recreation provide jobs and generate income for the community and for local businesses.

Day Camps

1.2 Photo by City of Burbank
SECTION ONE: INTRODUCTION
5 | City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan
1 Photo by the City of Burbank
City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan | 6
Master Plan Process1.3
As illustrated in exhibit 1.3-1, the City Parks
Master Plan process began in September
of 2023 and included approximately over
a year of research, community outreach,
and reporting. Critical to the process
was the development of the community
voice. Through the lens of the community,
program and facility priorities are set,
leading to the recommendations that will
assist in the future development of parks
and recreation in Burbank.

Over a six-month period (December-May)
focused community outreach methods
were used to collect data from various
segments of the community. Stakeholder
interviews, community workshops, online
surveys, direct feedback surveys, and a
statistically valid multimodal community
survey were each conducted to gather
insight into the community’s views and
desires for park amenities, facilities,
programs, and services.

Exhibit 1.3-1:

Project Timeline
Multimodal
Community
Survey
Workshop
ONEStakeholder
Interviews
Custom Park
Standards
Calculation
Kick Off Meeting
Project Website
Launched to
Public
Inventory of Parks,
Recreation Facilities,
and ProgramsDemographic
Assessment
Existing
Documentation
Review
2023 | 2024
Community Outreach
SEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE JULY AUG./OCT. NOV./DEC.

SECTION ONE: INTRODUCTION
7 | City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan
1 A project website was developed that
outlined the Master Plan purpose, process,
and identified a schedule of dates on how
residents can get involved in the outreach
opportunities. As each segment of the
community outreach was completed,
the results were published on the website
for the community to view and provide
feedback. This component extended the
ability for anyone to review the information
collected and provide feedback at any
time.

After the outreach process was
completed, the data was synthesized
into a prioritized programs and facilities
matrix clearly portraying the voice of
the community. This list of priorities was
then compared against the inventory of
existing facilities collected. The results of
the comparison formed the basis for the
recommendations presented in this report.

In Fall 2024, this report and subsequent
public presentations were developed to
clearly illustrate what facilities exist, what
the community priorities are, and how the
two can align today and in the future.

Workshop
TWO
Workshop
THREE Community Needs
Assessment
Financial Review &
Recommendations
General Plan
Review Recommendations
and CIP ReviewLocal Trends
Analysis
Operations & Maintenance
Plan
Report
Development
Public Meetings
& Presentations
SEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE JULY AUG./OCT. NOV./DEC.

City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan | 8
Photo by the City of Burbank
SECTION ONE: INTRODUCTION
9 | City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan
1 Burbank

1.4 Regional Setting
The City of Burbank, located in Los Angeles
County, California, is positioned at the
southeastern end of the San Fernando Valley,
north of downtown Los Angeles. Renowned
for its significant role in the entertainment
industry, with major studios like Warner Bros.

Entertainment and Walt Disney Studios calling
it home, Burbank contributes to the rich
cultural tapestry of the greater Los Angeles
area. Bordered by neighboring cities such as
North Hollywood, Glendale, and Toluca Lake,
Burbank thrives in a dynamic regional setting
characterized by diverse communities and a
robust economic landscape, reflective of its
status as a prominent hub within the greater
Los Angeles region.

Exhibit 1.4-1:

Regional Setting
Copyright © 1995–2024 Esri.

All rights reserved.

City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan | 10

1.5 Verdugo MountainsMajor Freeways
(Interstate 5, State Route 134)
Hollywood Burbank Airport
Photo by Google Maps
Photo by Google Earth
Photo by the City of Burbank
Local Setting
Burbank is a medium sized city, covering an area of approximately 17.35 square miles.

The City is characterized by a unique blend of housing developments, parks, and local businesses, contributing to a community-oriented atmosphere. Burbank hosts a variety of local events, community gatherings, and recreational opportunities, fostering a sense of cohesion among its residents. The city’s local setting is marked by a balance between urban amenities and a more suburban feel, creating a distinctive and inviting environment for those who call Burbank home. The City is shaped by the natural environment and man- made structures that provide both opportunities and constraints with respect to parks and recreation. These include:
1 - Major Freeways (Interstate 5, State Route 134) 3 - Hollywood Burbank Airport 2 - Verdugo Mountains
SECTION ONE: INTRODUCTION
11 | City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan
1 Exhibit 1.5-1:

Local Setting
Copyright © 1995–2024 Esri.

All rights reserved.
5 5
City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan | 12
Related Studies
There are existing documents and plans that relate to the planning of parks and recreation and influence its direction. These documents and their relationship to the planning process include:

Bicycle Master Plan (2009)
The City of Burbank’s Bicycle Master
Plan aims to create a bicycle-friendly
environment that enhances community
health, reduces traffic congestion,
and promotes cycling as a sustainable
transportation alternative. The plan outlines
policies for creating bike-friendly streets,
ensuring new developments contribute
to the city’s cycling infrastructure, and
promoting public engagement and
safety education. With goals to increase
bike trips to five percent by 2035, the plan
emphasizes collaboration between city
officials, staff, and residents to foster a
thriving cycling culture while maintaining
the quality of Burbank’s roadways and
neighborhoods.

Burbank Cultural Arts Plan (2009)
The Cultural Arts Plan outlined future goals
for the City of Burbank including:

Goal #1: CULTURAL ARTS LEADERSHIP
To formalize cultural arts leadership
for Burbank, to provide cultural arts
stewardship for Burbank, and to implement
and monitor the Burbank Cultural Arts
Plan, specifically its four goals. Leadership
structure will be as an advisory committee
to connect the arts to resources.

Goal #2: SUPPORT OF THE ARTS
To stimulate cultural arts support,
awareness and arts participation by
promoting arts organizations, programs
and the broadest possible collaborations,
to better serve the Burbank region. The
strategies within this goal encourage using
contemporary technology as methods of
communication.

Goal #3: ARTS EDUCATION AND ACCESS
This is an extension of Burbank’s
commitment to access and equity of all
arts disciplines to all generations in the City
and region.

Goal #4: FACILITIES/VENUE OPTIMIZATION
Restructuring and improving the usage
of existing facilities, and creating new
spaces and facilities, for all forms of arts
presentations.

Cultural Arts Framework (2024)
The Burbank Cultural Arts Framework is a
strategic plan created to enhance and
prioritize Burbank’s cultural arts scene
over the next five years. Building on the
achievements of the 2009 Cultural Arts
Plan, the framework, facilitated by arts
consultants and the Burbank Cultural Arts
Commission (BCAC), aims to increase
arts visibility, develop infrastructure, and
improve access to arts spaces. With
a vision to make Burbank a top arts
destination and strengthen its creative
sector workforce, the plan outlines key
priorities such as building capacity for
cultural arts programming, fostering
partnerships, and utilizing both public and
private spaces for arts activities. Emphasis
is placed on collaboration with local
entities, supporting artists, and attracting
tourism through expanded arts initiatives.

Arts and culture are central to the
City of Burbank, enriching the lives
of its residents, visitors, and business
community. The creative economy,
including Burbank’s many media and
entertainment companies, fosters
increased local vibrancy and garners
recognition as the world’s media capital.

1.6 SECTION ONE: INTRODUCTION
13 | City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan
1 Burbank seeks to further its arts and
cultural production by supporting a
diverse and thriving art scene that makes
Burbank a destination city. A healthy arts
vibrancy improves well-being, increases
cultural tourism, and helps artists and
local businesses, just to name a few.

Looking to the future, Burbank is
committed to:
• Build capacity to deliver broader
cultural arts programming
• Increase visibility for arts and culture
offerings and as an arts leader
• Welcome and nurture arts of all
disciplines by providing access to
spaces
• Facilitate partnerships across many
sectors and among individuals to
collaborate and strengthen the
environment for the arts and creative
sector workforce
Burbank2035 General Plan (2013)
Burbank2035 General Plan balances vision
with practicality. Burbank’s decisions
will focus on managing growth within its
boundaries, strengthening neighborhoods
and businesses, making streets places for
people, and preserving the resources that
together make Burbank a desirable place
to live, work, and play.

Burbank’s parks, open space and
recreational facilities are valuable
resources for the community and are
carefully maintained, preserved, and
expanded wherever possible. The
Verdugo Mountains are a unique natural
resource in an urban environment that
Burbank is fortunate to enjoy. Preserving
this asset is a priority for the city.

Starlight Bowl Amphitheatre
Transformation Plan (2018)
January 2014- Starlight Bowl Amphitheatre
Renovations and Facility Programming
report was presented to the City. After that
initial study then the 2015 efforts began
and then again in 2018 Starlight Bowl
Amphitheatre Transformation- Schematic
Design and Programming report was
completed.

Lehrer Architects was commissioned by
the City of Burbank, to provide Schematic
Design services for Phase I of the work as
outlined in the Starlight Bowl Re-phasing
Plan dated January 21, 2015 as well as
additional Enhanced Services. Disciplines
included Architectural, Landscape
Architecture, Civil, Mechanical,
Electrical and Plumbing Engineering,
Acoustical and Theatrical Consulting,
Arts and Managements Consulting,
Traffic Consulting, and Cost Consultant
in capacity of estimating total cost of
ownership.

The proposed design looks to address
the Starlight Bowl’s multitude of existing
accessibility issues, outdated performance
support areas and back of house support
infrastructure and site topological and
geological challenges.

Community Opinion Survey (2022)
The Burbank Community Opinion Survey
2022, gathered insights from 590 registered
voters regarding their views on living in
Burbank, key issues, and city services. A
majority rated Burbank as an excellent or
good place to live, appreciating its safety,
cleanliness, and sense of community. The
top concerns among residents included
homelessness, crime, high housing costs,
over development, and reckless driving.

Residents were generally satisfied with
city services, especially fire protection,
trash collection, and public maintenance.

City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan | 14
SECTION ONE: INTRODUCTION
Most residents were also satisfied with the
city’s communication efforts, with word
of mouth and city publications being
common information sources.

George Izay Park Master Plan (2022)
While the data gathered as part of the
public engagement process for George
Izay Park Master Plan was critical, much
of it can be utilized to understand park
and recreation development on a
city-wide scale. Many of the questions
asked during the multimodal survey
and the demographic analysis can be
applied to city-wide park and recreation
needs. By taking a closer look at all of
Burbank’s available recreation amenities,
deficiencies and surplus’ in facilities can
be identified and earmarked for future
development at specific park sites.

Community needs identified by the
George Izay Park public engagement
process included dedicated pickleball
courts, a dog park, splash pad or water
feature, skate park, or community
gardens are amenities that work well
within the framework of a citywide park
and recreation master plan analysis.

These amenities may already be planned
elsewhere in the community (like two
upcoming community garden sites and a
new dog park) or are not size appropriate
at George Izay without modifying existing
facilities. By studying the availability of
such facilities or planned improvements,
park and recreation planning can be
focused on the needs of the community
and future demographic demands.

Tennis / Pickleball Survey (2023)
The Tennis/Pickleball Community Survey
conducted in July 2023 gathered
feedback from 385 participants, primarily
focusing on the usage and preferences for
tennis and pickleball at George Izay Park
(Olive) in Burbank. A significant majority
played pickleball over tennis. The survey
highlighted strong community demand
for expanded pickleball court hours and
additional courts due to overcrowding
and long wait times. Respondents
expressed a preference for morning play
and supported the idea of dedicated
pickleball courts rather than sharing
with tennis courts. The survey revealed
a desire for more equitable access and
improvements to court facilities, including
lighting and the ability to reserve courts in
advance.

Fee Nexus Study (2022)
The Burbank Development Impact Fee
(DIF) Nexus Study (2022) outlines the
fees that the City of Burbank will collect
from new residential and non-residential
developments to fund infrastructure and
public facilities needed to accommodate
growth through 2035. These impact
fees are intended to cover the cost of
capital improvements for various city
services, including fire, police, parks,
library, information technology, and
transportation infrastructure. The study
provides the legal basis and methodology
for calculating the maximum allowable
fees based on projected population and
employment growth.
15 | City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan
1 Photo by the City of Burbank
Cultural Arts Planning Survey (2024)
The Cultural Arts Planning Survey was
created to help the Burbank Parks &
Recreation Department and the Burbank
Cultural Arts Commission better understand
how to best serve Burbank. Overall, 1353
surveys (75% of the respondents were
Burbank residents and approximately 10%
of the respondents worked in Burbank).

Highlights from the survey included:
• Most respondents (76%) considered
an investment in the arts in Burbank
important.
• Respondents also affirmed (75%)
that they would like Burbank to be a
destination city with vibrant arts and
culture offerings that attract tourism.
• 64% of the respondents indicated that
Burbank needs to increase or improve
its arts and cultural program offerings.
• A multi-choice survey question asked
respondents to identify one arts and
culture priority that was important
to them. The three highest priorities
included supporting in-school arts
education (24%), having a performing
arts or multi-arts center (23%), and
creating a signature event (15%).
• A multi-choice survey question asked
respondents to identify what arts and
culture programming they like to see
and experience more of in Burbank.

The four similar ranked experiences
included performing arts (25%), outdoor
events and activities (25%), visual arts
(20%), and arts education (18%) [i.e.,
youth, adults, seniors].

City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan | 16
Exhibit 2.1-1:

Tapestry LifeMode Map
Copyright © 1995–2024 Esri.

All rights reserved.
17 | City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan
2 A Community Profile
Who is Burbank?
Understanding the demographic context of a community can create a valuable perspective for understanding current parks, recreation facilities, and program requirements. It is also crucial for anticipating needs in the future. This information provides a deeper understanding of “who” the community is and “where” they are geographically and economically.

99.3% of Burbank’s households fall into one of seven Tapestry LifeMode groups:

SECTION TWO:

COMMUNITY VOICE

2.1 1
3 2
13 8
8A, 8C, 8D, 8F
Average Age: 37
Average Income: $55K
% of Burbank Households: 39.7%
2A, 2B, 2C, 2D
Average Age: 41
Average Income: $95K
% of Burbank Households: 24.2%
3A, 3B, 3C
Average Age: 35
Average Income: $81K
% of Burbank Households: 18%
13A, 13B
Average Age: 31
Average Income: $42K
% of Burbank Households: 8.04%
1A, 1D, 1E
Average Age: 48
Average Income: $128K
% of Burbank Households: 5.3%
9F
Average Age: 46
Average Income: $18K
% of Burbank Households: 4.07%
Mix of single/married, renters/homeowners,
and middle/working class. Majority attended
college. Internet savvy. Commonly interested
in night life and outdoor activities.

Typically prosperous married couples living in
older suburban neighborhoods or townhomes.

Majority are homeowners. Many with older
children. Generally interested in active
recreation and fitness.

Successful singles. Well educated and
hard working. Environmentally conscious
consumers. Commonly interested in arts and
culture.

Young, diverse, hard-working families with
children. Multi-generational households,
some may be multi-lingual. Most are renters.

Typically successful, highly educated
professionals. Mostly homeowners. Married
couples with children ranging from grade
school to college. Known to participate
actively in their communities.

Married empty nesters or singles living alone.

Have cell phones and land lines. Tend to
have regular exercise routine and are health
conscience.
9 The remaining Tapestry LifeMode group represents 0.7% of the Burbank population:
5 5A
Average Age: 48
Average Income: $75K
% of Burbank Households: 0.7%
Gen X in middle age. Families with fewer kids
and a mortgage. Invest wisely, well insured,
comfortable banking online or in person.

News enthusiasts.

City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan | 18
A Community Profile (continued)
How old are Burbank residents?
The City of Burbank’s Age Profile is illustrated in exhibit 2.1-2. The City of Burbank’s age profile is similar to that of the County of Los Angeles. Burbank has a lower youth population compared to the County of Los Angeles; 19% of the population is below 19 years of age. 17% of the population in Burbank is over 65 years of age, which is higher than the 14.1% that are over 65 years of age for all of Los Angeles County.

Exhibit 2.1-2: Burbank Age Profile
Compared to Los Angeles County
SECTION TWO: COMMUNITY VOICE

2.1 19 | City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan
2 Exhibit 2.1-3:

Community Profile
To enhance the analysis population
growth, housing unit growth, and age
profiles for the resident population
was compiled. Highlights of these
demographic trends include:
• The Esri forecast data set indicates
population growth will slow down and
the population will increase to 106,510
by 2026. The five-year growth from
2023 to 2026 of 1.1% is similar to the
County’s average growth rate of 1.2%
change from 2023 to 2026. The City’s
General Plan2035 predicts that the
population will reach 116,516 in 2035.
• Housing unit growth in the City during
the 2010 to 2021 time frame occurring
at a 2.8% rate, with approximately 83.5
new housing units documented each
year on average. The City housing unit
growth fell below the County rate of

3.8%.
• The average household size in the
City of Burbank increased slightly from

2.45 persons in 2010 to 2.49 persons
in 2021 representing a 1.6% increase,
which is more than the County
average for that time frame (0.0%).

Community Profile Overview
With a 2023 population estimate of 105,357
and a projected increase to 116,516 by
2035, Burbank’s growth rate aligns with the
Los Angeles County average. The median
age of 41.1 indicates an aging population,
with the largest growth expected among
residents aged 80-84. Burbank’s racial and
ethnic composition, household size, and
housing trends are explored, revealing
a slight increase in household size and
a decrease in homeownership, with a
shift towards renting. The demographic
assessment provides a valuable foundation
for understanding Burbank’s community
profile and informing future planning and
development initiatives.

Source: Claritas Estimate & Esri 2021 Demographic Data 105,357
2023 Population

2.5 Average
Household Size
$82,958
Median
Household
Income

41.1 Median Age
City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan | 20
1 2
3 2.2 Community Outreach and Engagement
The community outreach campaign developed for this Master Plan utilized multiple methods of information sharing and data collection including in-person presentations, online video presentations, one-on-one stakeholder interviews, public online surveys, a statistically valid multimodal survey, and online website feedback surveys.

Throughout the process, project updates and summary results were posted to the project website. This website enabled community members to review updates and provide immediate feedback at any point in time. This resource enabled anyone in the community to have a voice in the process regardless of when and where meetings were held.

The purpose of gathering community input through a variety of methods is to ensure that the Master Plan is as inclusive as possible and that it reflects the views, preferences, and recreation patterns of Burbank residents. Within this section, community feedback has been recorded in three (3) separate modes:

Mode One: One-on-One Stakeholder Interviews
Direct one-on-one interviews with key stakeholders, elected officials, and City staff members were conducted in a format where participants discussed key issues and opinions on facility and program needs that should be considered in the Master Plan.

Mode Two: Statistically Valid Surveys
Direct survey responses were collected through a statistically valid, multimodal survey. This survey was conducted via telephone (land lines and cell numbers), text, and email to ensure the entire population demographic was represented.

Additionally an analysis of sports organizations that utilize city facilities was conducted to evaluate surplus or deficit of sports facilities. The analysis can be found in section 3.5.

Mode Three: Community at Large Public Workshops
Public community consensus-building workshops were held via in-person and online meetings. Meetings were open to the public where community members could learn about past survey results, ask questions of the planning team, and participate in surveys. There was also a feedback survey on the project website where community members could send their comments directly to the planning team.

SECTION TWO: COMMUNITY VOICE
21 | City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan
2 Total Combined Participants Reached:
5,550
Total Website Views
104
Total Social
Media Likes
646
Total YouTube Video
Views
18 Stakeholder Interviews &
Focus Groups
157
Total Website Feedback
Comments
1,000
Residents Represented in
Multimodal Survey of
400
Households
1,988
Total Surveys Completed
6,880
Players
Represented by
12 Sports Organizations
Surveyed
All participation numbers as of 9/20/24
City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan | 22
Mode One - Stakeholder Interviews:

The following summarizes the results of the ten (10) stakeholder interviews conducted as a part of the public outreach effort to assist in the preparation of the Master Plan.

The interviews were held between March 15 and April 12, 2024 . Stakeholders were interviewed in a one-on-one environment over a secure online virtual meeting. Over a series of seven (7) questions, various topics were discussed to identify important recreation issues, programs, and facility needs. The following charts illustrate the frequency of similar responses.

What are the most important issues in Burbank related to the parks, recreation facilities, programs, and services currently provided? What are the most important parks, recreation facilities, programs, and services for residents in the future?
1st
1st
2nd
2nd
3rd
3rd
4th
4th
5th
5th
Facility Maintenance and Upgrading
Green Space
Programs for All Ages
Youth Programs
Restroom Cleanliness and Availability
Environmental Initiatives
Accessibility and ADA Compliance
Facility Updates and Maintenance
Environmental Concerns and Sustainability
Pedestrian and Bike Paths
SECTION TWO: COMMUNITY VOICE
23 | City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan
2 What is the one recreation facility you
would most like to see added or improved
in Burbank to meet the needs of the
community?

FACILITIES
What is the one program, class, or activity
you would most like to see added or
expanded in Burbank to meet the needs of
the community?

PROGRAMS
Additional details that were discussed are available in the appendix document.

MOST COMMONLY IDENTIFIED:
• Sports and Arts for Youth: These
responses encompass sports, arts,
music classes, and day camps for
youth.
• Environmental Initiatives: Including
composting, community gardens,
and sustainable landscape planning.
• Educational Programs: Media
courses, outdoor education, and
programs with social opportunities.
• Aquatic Programs: Focused on
activities related to water sports and
swimming.
• Nature Education: Programs aimed
at engaging children with nature
and environmental conservation.

MOST COMMONLY IDENTIFIED:
• Pickleball Courts: Mentioned multiple
times across different responses,
indicating a high level of interest.
• Performing Arts Center: Desired as a
first-rate facility with accessibility and
cost considerations.
• Splash Pads: Respondents
mentioned the need for a splash
pad in a city park.
• Theater: Suggestions for a new
theater to enhance community
cultural and performance offerings.
• Park Restrooms: Repeated emphasis
on improving and maintaining park
restrooms.

City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan | 24
Mode One - City Staff Focus Group:

The City of Burbank conducted a staff focus group on January 17, 2024 in the community services building. The focus group explored topics including a) park and facility development and enhancement, b) program development and enhancement. The (8) focus groups included forty-eight (48) participants in total.

Staff members from the Parks and Recreation Department were invited to discuss each topic and present options for areas of improvement or importance in future recreation planning efforts. At the conclusion of each topic staff presented their top three items.

The following is a summary of the top consensus responses.

SECTION TWO: COMMUNITY VOICE
What is the one recreation facility you
would most like to see added or improved
in Burbank to meet the needs of the
community?

FACILITIES
What is the one program, class, or activity
you would most like to see added or
expanded in Burbank to meet the needs of
the community?

PROGRAMS
MOST COMMONLY IDENTIFIED:
• Lighting (outdoor, energy saving,
more)
• Parking (employee parking structure)
• Teen Center (lounge, homework,
college and career support, safe
space)
• Dog Park
• Indoor Pool or Spa
• Pickleball
• Soccer Fields
• Starlight Bowl Renovation
• Volleyball Court (beach / outdoor)
MOST COMMONLY IDENTIFIED:
• Teen Programs (teen nights)
• Safety (keyless entry, cameras,
check-in)
• More Concerts at Starlight Bowl
• Senior Services (support groups,
cleaning services)
25 | City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan
2 Photo by City of Burbank
Photo by City of Burbank
City of Burbank Staff Focus Group on January 17, 2024
Photo by City of Burbank
City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan | 26
Mode Two - Statistically Valid Multimodal Survey
A total of 400 households were surveyed between December 5, 2023 and December 17, 2023. A survey of this size yields a margin of error of +/-5%, with a confidence level of 95%. The survey followed a mixed-method design that employed multiple recruiting methods (email, text, and telephone) and multiple data collection methods (telephone and online). The survey was administered in English (88%), Spanish (9%), and Armenian (3%) languages and the average interview lasted 15 minutes. Security measures precluded individuals from completing the survey more than once and allowed only the designated respondents to complete the survey. Online respondents were able to use their computer, tablet, or smart phone to participate.

Our sample used stratified random sampling
methodology to ensure that the demographic
proportions of survey respondents match the
demographic composition of City of Burbank
residents.

Critical in the data collected
is the geolocation of the
participants. Exhibit 2.2-1
indicates that there was an
equal geographic distribution
of participants across the City.

This not only validates the
statistically valid component
of the survey, but also indicates
there is not a geographic bias
in the data being recorded
from only one end of the
community and not the other.

Exhibit 2.2-1: Multimodal Survey
Response Distribution Map
Copyright © 1995–2024 Esri.

All rights reserved.

SECTION TWO: COMMUNITY VOICE
27 | City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan
2 Subjects explored in the context of the multimodal survey included:
48%
Participate in Recreation Programs in
Burbank at Least Once a Year
15%
Listed McCambridge Park as the Most
Often Used Park or Recreation Facility
81%
Are Satisfied with the Maintenance of
City Parks and Recreation Facilities
What Park Feature, Amenity, or
Recreation Facility Residents Would Most
Like to See Added or Improved
75%
Are Satisfied with Existing Parks,
Facilities, and Programs
58%
Utilize a Park or Recreational Facility in
Burbank at Least Monthly
86%
Get Information from the City Website,
Google / the Internet, or Social Media
What Program, Class, or Activity
Residents Would Most Like to See
Added or Improved
8%
6%
5%
4%
4%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%
13%
7%
5%
5%
5%
5%
4%
4%
Swimming Pools
Playground Updates
Preserve Green Areas/Trees/Grass
Restrooms
Walking Paths/Trails
Soccer Fields
Dog Parks
Tennis Courts
Pickleball Courts
More Parks
Swimming Classes
Yoga/Meditation
Children’s Activities
Pickleball
Art Classes
Senior Activities
Fitness/Exercise Center/Zumba
Basketball
City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan | 28
Mode Three - Community Workshop #1
Residents of the City of Burbank were invited
to the community workshop to learn about
the City Parks Master Plan process and to
participate in the first workshop survey.

Workshop #1 commenced on March 13,
2024, at 6:00 PM to 8:00 PM at the Joslyn
Adult Center at George Izay Park. Following
the in-person meeting, a commencement
video of the workshop #1 presentation
was made available online on the project
website for those who could not attend in
person.

The Workshop #1 survey was available
online and paper copies were available at
the city’s recreation facilities. The Workshop
#1 Survey was also advertised on the City’s
social media, City website, and flyers were
distributed at the city’s parks and recreation
facilities. The Workshop #1 Survey was open
for over two weeks until March 31, 2024. A
total of four hundred, fifty-nine (459) surveys
were completed.

Exhibit 2.2-2: Workshop #1 Survey
Response Distribution Map
Copyright © 1995–2024 Esri.

All rights reserved.

Day after the in person
meeting, Commencement
Video posted on RJM’s You
Tube Channel and made
available to the public via
City’s social media and
project website. Online
survey opens for 2 weeks*.

Online survey
results collected
Survey results
posted on
project website
Summary report
developed
Community Workshop Process
In person presentation
and discussion. Individual
and group consensus
building activities.
*paper copies of surveys made available at City’s
recreation facilities.

SECTION TWO: COMMUNITY VOICE
29 | City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan
2 What are the most important community characteristics that make the City of Burbank a great place to live, work and play? What are the issues or trends that may be negatively impacting those important community characteristics and should be considered in the City Parks Master Plan?
What role can the City of Burbank play in addressing those issues and support the community characteristics that make the City of Burbank a great place to live, work and play?
1st
1st
1st
2nd
2nd
2nd
3rd
3rd
3rd
4th
4th
4th
5th
5th
5th
Community and Small Town Feel
Parks and Green Spaces
Safety, Cleanliness, and Maintenance
Family-Friendly Activities and Education
Traffic and Pedestrian Safety
Community Engagement and Feedback
Safety and Cleanliness
Homelessness and Housing Affordability
Recreational Facility and Park Expansion
Parks and Recreation
Recreational Facilities and Programs
Program Diversity and Accessibility
Accessibility and Amenities
Community Services and Accessibility
Environmental Conservation and Green Spaces
City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan | 30
Mode Three - Community Workshop #2
Residents of the City of Burbank were invited
to the community workshop to learn about
the City Parks Master Plan process and to
participate in the second survey. Workshop
#2 commenced on April 10, 2024, at 6:00pm
to 8:00pm at the Mary Alvord Recreation
Center at Verdugo Park. Following the in-
person meeting, a commencement video
of the workshop #2 presentation was made
available online on the project website for
those who could not attend in person.

The workshop #2 survey was available
online and paper copies were available at
the city’s recreation facilities. The Workshop
#2 Survey was also advertised on the City’s
social media, City website, and flyers were
distributed at the city’s parks and recreation
facilities. The Workshop #2 Survey was open
for two weeks until April 24, 2024. A total of
three hundred, eighty-three (383) surveys
were completed.

Exhibit 2.2-3: Workshop #2 Survey
Response Distribution Map
Community Workshop 2 on April 10, 2024
Photo by RJM Design Group
Copyright © 1995–2024 Esri.

All rights reserved.

SECTION TWO: COMMUNITY VOICE Self-led Sports or Recreation Activities 31 | City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan
2 Exhibit 2.2-3: Workshop #2 Survey
Response Distribution Map
What is the name of the park or recreation facility in Burbank that members of your household visit the most?
Why do you visit this park the most often?

PROGRAM DESIRES

FACILITY DESIRES
• Soccer Fields
•
Pickleball Courts
•
Swimming Pool Upgrades
•
Dog Parks
•
Playground Improvements
• Sports Programs
•
Youth Programs
•
Health and Wellness
•
Educational Activities
•
Community Development and
Engagement
A full list of responses is available in the appendix document. 1st
1st
2nd
2nd
3rd
3rd
George Izay Park
Organized Recreation Classes or Programs
Self-led Sports or Recreation Activities
Organized Sports
Verdugo Park
Tuttle Adult Center
City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan | 32
ATTACHMENT 1
Mode Three - Community Workshop #3
Residents of the City of Burbank were invited
to the community workshop to learn about
the City Parks Master Plan process, and
to participate in the third and final survey.

Workshop #3 commenced on May 8, 2024
at 6:00pm to 8:00pm at McCambridge
Recreation Center. The workshop was in-
person and available online for those who
could not attend. The Workshop #3 Survey
included two lists: one of program, class, and
activity needs and one of park feature and
facility needs from the community outreach
efforts to date. The survey asked participants
to choose their top five (5) program and park
needs.

The Workshop #3 Survey was open for two
weeks until May 22, 2024. Following the in-
person meeting, a commencement video
of the workshop #2 presentation was made
available online on the project website for
those who could not attend in person. The
survey was available online and paper copies were available at the City’s recreation facilities. The Workshop #3 Survey was also advertised on the City’s social media, City website, and flyers were distributed at the city’s parks and recreation facilities. A total of one thousand, one-hundred and forty-six (1,146) completed surveys were completed.

Exhibit 2.2-4: Workshop #3 Survey
Response Distribution Map
Community Workshop 3 on May 8, 2024
Photo by the City of Burbank
Copyright © 1995–2024 Esri.

All rights reserved.

SECTION TWO: COMMUNITY VOICE
33 | City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan
2 Exhibit 2.2-4: Workshop #3 Survey
Response Distribution Map
Community Workshop 3 on May 8, 2024
Photo by the City of Burbank

PROGRAM DESIRES

FACILITY DESIRES
• Soccer Fields
• Restrooms
• Add More Parks and Green Areas
• Walking Paths or Trails
• Playground Improvements
• Ballfield Improvements
• Bike Trails
• Splash Pad
• Park Maintenance
• Dog Park
• Soccer Program
• After School Program
• Children Activities
• Youth Sports
• Affordable Classes / Activities for
Low-Income Households
• Arts and Crafts Class
• Swimming Class / Competitive Swim
• Cultural Events
• Gardening Classes
• Improve Reservation System for
Sports / Facilities
A full list of responses is available in the appendix document.

City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan | 34
Mode Three - Project Website and
Feedback Survey
A project website was developed to
keep the community informed all day,
everyday. The website launched to the
public on December 5, 2023. Throughout
the project, updates were published and
surveys made available on the project
website. Website views totaled 5,550,
averaging 15 views per day.

A total of 157 feedback comments were
received throughout the project. The
feedback survey option was available on
the project website and opened with the
website launch in December 2023 and
remained open for the duration of the
project.

Exhibit 2.2-5: Feedback Survey
Response Distribution Map
Copyright © 1995–2024 Esri.

All rights reserved.

SECTION TWO: COMMUNITY VOICE
3rd Grade Elementary School Thank You Card Dedicated Project Website 35 | City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan
2 • Soccer Field
• Playgrounds
• Pickleball Court
• Restrooms
• Bike Paths
• Parking
• Trees
• Splash Pad or Water Feature
• Walking Trails
• Shade
• General Park Improvements
• Dog Park
• Accessibility
• Arts and Culture
• Youth Sports
• Maintenance
The full summary report and additional details that were discussed are available in the Appendix document.

FACILITIESPROGRAMS
Photo by the City of Burbank
Youth Soccer Camp
City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan | 36
Photo by the City of Burbank
SECTION TWO: COMMUNITY VOICE
37 | City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan
2 Summarizing the Community Voice
Throughout the process, numerous needs have been identified and recorded across multiple modes of outreach (Individual Interviews, Community at Large Virtual Workshops, and Statistically Valid Surveys). The community voice is developed through synthesizing all the data into a single summary, representing both program and facility needs. It is generally helpful to attempt to determine which needs have the highest priority as perceived by the largest number of residents (identified as the area of maximum community impact).

To achieve this analysis, each response recorded from the community is cataloged in a matrix. As an individual program or facility need is brought up, it is recorded for frequency in the specific outreach mode in which it was received. Needs that have been identified in each of the three modes have a higher impact across the community than needs identified in only one of these modes.

Exhibits 2.3-1 and 2.3-2 illustrate the classification of these needs by grouping them into categories – Frequent (3 modes), Apparent (2 modes), and Identified (1 mode). The number of times the need was listed across all modes outlines an area of maximum community impact. For example, dog park (5) is ranked higher than accessible playgrounds and facilities for those with disabilities (3) because it was identified in each of the three outreach modes. The recommendations illustrate where improvements will have the maximum impact across the entire community.

2.3 FACILITIES
Frequent:
• Add More Parks and Green Areas
• Dog Park
• Pickleball Courts
• Restrooms
• Soccer Fields
• Sustainable Park Management
• Swimming Pool Improvements
• Walking Paths or Trails
Apparent:
• Accessible Playgrounds and Facilities for
Those with Disabilities
• Bike Trails
• Park Maintenance
• Parking and Transportation
• Performance Venue
• Playground Improvements
• Splash Pad

PROGRAMS
Frequent:
• Arts and Cultural Programs
• More Senior Programs and Activities
• Swimming Class/Competitive Swim
Apparent:
• Day Camp
• Youth Sports
City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan | 38
Multimodal Community Survey
NOTE: Programs are encompassing of multiple “similar” community comments. Individual comments are identified in the recommendations and appendix.

Stakeholder Interviews /
Staff Focus Group

BURBANK PARKS MASTER PLAN
Program Needs Prioritization Summary
6 4
4 3
3 Area of
maximum
community
impact
Statistically Valid SurveysStakeholder/Focus Group Community at Large Public Surveys Workshop 1 / Workshop 2 /
Workshop 3 /
Feedback Comments

FREQUENT

APPARENT
/gid00042/gid00037/gid00038/gid00047/gid00053/gid00042/gid00039/gid00042/gid00038/gid00037 Multimodal Community Survey
NOTE: Programs are encompassing of multiple “similar” community comments. Individual comments are identified in the recommendations and appendix.

Stakeholder Interviews /
Staff Focus Group

BURBANK PARKS MASTER PLAN
Program Needs Prioritization Summary
6 4
4 3
3 Area of
maximum
community
impact
Statistically Valid SurveysStakeholder/Focus Group Community at Large Public Surveys Workshop 1 / Workshop 2 /
Workshop 3 /
Feedback Comments

FREQUENT

APPARENT
/gid00042/gid00037/gid00038/gid00047/gid00053/gid00042/gid00039/gid00042/gid00038/gid00037 Exhibit 2.3-1:

Program Priorities
Program Priorities
SECTION TWO: COMMUNITY VOICE
39 | City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan
2 Statistically Valid Surveys
Multimodal Community Survey
CPSC’s
NOTE: Facilities are encompassing of multiple “similar” community comments. Individual comments are identified in the recommendations and appendix.

Stakeholder/Focus Group
Stakeholder Interviews /
Staff Focus Group
Community at Large Public Surveys
Workshop 1 / Workshop 2 /
Workshop 3 /
Feedback Comments

BURBANK PARKS MASTER PLAN
Facility Needs Prioritization Summary
4 4
4 3
3 3
3 3
5 4
6 6
5 5
5 Area of
maximum
community
impact

FREQUENT

APPARENT
/gid00042/gid00037/gid00038/gid00047/gid00053/gid00042/gid00039/gid00042/gid00038/gid00037 Statistically Valid Surveys
Multimodal Community Survey
CPSC’s
NOTE: Facilities are encompassing of multiple “similar” community comments. Individual comments are identified in the recommendations and appendix.

Stakeholder/Focus Group
Stakeholder Interviews /
Staff Focus Group
Community at Large Public Surveys
Workshop 1 / Workshop 2 /
Workshop 3 /
Feedback Comments

BURBANK PARKS MASTER PLAN
Facility Needs Prioritization Summary
4 4
4 3
3 3
3 3
5 4
6 6
5 5
5 Area of
maximum
community
impact

FREQUENT

APPARENT
/gid00042/gid00037/gid00038/gid00047/gid00053/gid00042/gid00039/gid00042/gid00038/gid00037 Note: There were no facility deficits from the CPSC's (see page 63 for CPSC Analysis).

Exhibit 2.3-2:

Facility Priorities
Facility Priorities
City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan | 40
Photo by the City of Burbank
41 | City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan
3 Parks, Facilities, and Trails
What parks exist and where are they?
The process for evaluating the community
needs relies heavily on what parks and
recreation facilities exist today and how
they may or may not meet the needs of
the community. Carefully balancing the
inventory with the community needs and
desires will allow resources to be directed
to critical areas and ultimately maximize
the community benefit.

Park Types
Parks can be classified by type based
primarily on their size, function, and
character. The categorization of parks
is important in understanding City-wide
acreage needs and in communicating
what type of parks are needed in the
future.

The Burbank2035: General Plan identifies
five (5) broad categories of parks: Pocket,
Neighborhood, Community, and Regional
Parks, as well as Community/Public Golf
Course.

Pocket Park: Small in size, less than 1 acre,
serving only the immediate neighborhood.

Pocket parks are frequently created on
a single vacant building lot or on small,
irregular piece of land. These areas provide
a landscaped respite from neighborhoods
and often offer places to picnic or play.

The parks may contain limited assets such
as benches, picnic tables, open play area,
playground, and a sport court.

Neighborhood Park: These parks are from
1 to 10 acres and serve the surrounding
neighborhoods within ½ mile radius
(15-20 minute walk) without significant
architectural barriers. Neighborhood parks

3.1 should be located adjacent to elementary
schools whenever possible. The primary
consideration should be whether the existing
school has adequate play space to serve
both its educational needs and the needs
of the neighborhood for playground space.

Neighborhood parks should have street
frontage. If a park is located where adjacent
streets are insufficient for parking, the site
should have a parking lot. Neighborhood
parks should be easily accessible by
pedestrians and bicyclists. Park features
may include open play area, barbeques,
picnic tables, sport court, improved paths,
and may include restroom facilities and/or
a parking lot.

Community Park: Between 10 and 50 acres
in size and meets the recreational needs of
a larger segment of the community. They
may also preserve unique landscapes and
open spaces. Community park sites should
be accessible by arterial and/or collector
streets, as well as accessible by pedestrian
and bicyclists. Geographic range of users is
up to 3 miles or City-wide if park contains or is
adjacent to a community recreation facility.

The site for a community park should be of
sufficient size to include a recreation building
unless adjacent school facilities can be
designated to serve public uses when school
is not in session. Community park sites should
be readily accessible from pedestrian and
bicycle routes. These parks serve multiple
uses and provide recreational facilities that
accommodate group activities not typically
provided in neighborhood parks. Parking lot
and restroom facilities are typically provided
at these parks.

Regional Park: Greater than 50 acres, a large
area of developed and undeveloped land
preserved on account of its natural beauty,
historic interest, and recreational use.

SECTION THREE:

NEEDS ASSESSMENT
City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan | 42
Exhibit 3.1-1:

City Parks Map
Copyright © 1995–2024 Esri.

All rights reserved.

City Parks
The City of
Burbank currently
has twenty-six
(26) parks which
encompasses
731.85 acres
of developed
parkland and open
space.

SECTION THREE: NEEDS ASSESSMENT
43 | City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan
3 Recreation Facilities
Burbank’s Parks and Recreation Department
provides a great variety of programs
and services for the community at the
eighteen (18) recreation facilities shown
in exhibit 3.1-2. These
recreation facilities
host a variety
of programs,
activities, and
events.

Copyright © 1995–2024 Esri.

All rights reserved.

Exhibit 3.1-2:

Recreation Facilities Map
City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan | 44
Recreation Facilities (continued)
The city has agreements in place to assist in the staffing, operations, management, and maintenance of the following city-owned recreation facilities:
• Burbank Center Stage: Agreement with The Colony Theatre; • Burbank Tennis Center: Agreement with Burbank Tennis Center, Inc.; • Community Gardens: Agreement with Los Angeles Community Garden Council, Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, and Woodbury University • DeBell Golf Course: Management Agreement with Touchstone Golf, LLC. • L.A. Kings Sports Center: Operating Agreement with P.I.M Inc.; These partnership agreements allow the city to expand, enhance, and provide additional expertise and support to the City’s programs and services.

SECTION THREE: NEEDS ASSESSMENT
Photo by http://www.debellgolf.com/
DeBell Golf Course
45 | City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan
3 Trail Connectivity
Burbank has developed a comprehensive bicycle network, including various types of bikeways and parking facilities, to make cycling more appealing. Cooperation with neighboring cities and the MTA is essential for enhancing regional transit access and promoting commuter cycling. The bikeways are classified into four types: Bicycle Boulevards, Class I (bike paths), Class II (bike lanes), and Class III (bike routes). All streets, except freeways and ramps, are open to bicycles, and the city has installed extensive bicycle parking facilities.

Burbank aims to enhance the quality of life by creating a more walkable community.

Some sidewalks are currently inadequate, and some streets lack sidewalks altogether.

Pedestrian-friendly areas can improve public health, reduce traffic and pollution, and make the community more engaging. To address these issues, Burbank will develop a Pedestrian Master Plan, which will include improvement suggestions, design guidelines, and sidewalk standards. The Burbank2035 General Plan sets specific sidewalk width requirements that will guide this effort.

Source: Burbank
GeneralPlan2035
Exhibit 3.1-3: Existing Bike and
Pedestrian Trails Map
City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan | 46
Programs and Services
The City of Burbank offers a variety of
programs across different categories,
including Sports, Fitness, and Aquatics
Activities, Dance and Performing Arts
Programs, STEM Programs, Arts & Crafts
Activities, Child Care & Day Camps, Adult
Programs, Senior Programs, Special Events,
Social Services, and Disability Services.

These programs cater to different age
groups within the community and provide
a wide range of activities for all Burbank
residents.

Sports, Fitness, and Aquatic Activities:

The City of Burbank has an impressive
assortment of sports, fitness, and aquatics
programs available through its Parks and
Recreation Department. The programs
provide something literally for everyone
from tots to teens, and from adults to
seniors. A variety of youth sports programs,
leagues, and events are available
for tennis, swimming, skateboarding,
roller hockey, golf, basketball, soccer,
flag football, gymnastics, martial arts,
volleyball, and track and field. Adult
fitness classes include Zumba, yoga, Tai
Chi, ninja boot camps, cardio dance,
Pilates, and kickboxing. Adults also have
multiple program options available for
sports leagues and programs, including
softball, basketball, soccer, volleyball,
golf, kickball, and roller hockey. Several
classes are also available for Burbank
seniors, including senior softball, fitness,
and dance classes.

Recreation Classes and Activities
Beyond sports, fitness, and aquatics
classes, Burbank offers a variety of special
interest classes including activities in
culinary, performing, and visual arts.

Dance and performing arts programs like
ballet, tap, jazz, musical theater, and hip
hop are offered to both the youth and
adult populations.

The City also provides community gardens,
computer programming, robotics, and
other STEM programs. These are all in
addition to its seasonal programs and its
everyday arts and crafts classes.

Burbank Parks and Recreation
Photo by the City of Burbank

3.2 SECTION THREE: NEEDS ASSESSMENT
47 | City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan
3 Special Events
The city brings friends, neighbors, and the
community together to celebrate several
popular special events throughout the
year. The City’s Spring Eggs-Stravaganza,
Youth Art Expo, the Starlight Bowl Summer
Concerts, art gallery shows and receptions,
Haunted Adventure, Halloween Carnival,
the Mayor’s Tree Lighting and an
assortment of Winter Holiday events are
among the City’s popular annual events.

Participation Analysis
The City’s participation numbers at the
end of FY 2022/23 have shown growth
and a significant return from its pandemic
numbers in FY 2020/21. Attendance
increased by more than 8,800 participants
in team sports and leagues, nearly 11,500
in all sports and fitness classes, by more
than 4,250 in youth camps, and 1,775 in its
arts and crafts activities.

A detailed assessment of the recreation
programs is provided in the Appendix.

Community Programs
The city offers social services and resources
available to support its community. The City
Council adopted a five-year Homeless Plan
in November 2022 to address the ongoing
social issues of homelessness impacting
the Burbank community. The city provides
a number of programs and shares
additional programs/resources in support
of its community of adults 55+. Examples
include Project Hope, the Phone Pals
and Grab Bar Program, nutrition services,
and the Senior Resource Guide. Teen
programs include the Youth Leadership
Program, Burbank Youth Board, Counselor
in Training, Junior Lifeguard Program, Teen
Summer Daze, and Back to School Teen
Night.

The City’s website provides information
and links to a number of other resources
and social services programs available
for the community, including information
on 311 Our Burbank, US Veteran Affairs,
employment services, substance abuse
and addiction hotlines, and services
provided by other non-profit social services
organizations.

Youth Leadership Program
Photo by the City of Burbank
48%
Participate in Recreational Programs in
Burbank at Least Once a Year
75%
Are satisfied with the Existing Parks,
Recreational Facilities, and Programs
Source: 2023 Multimodal Survey
City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan | 48
Acreage Analysis
How Much Park Acreage is Needed for Burbank?
The City of Burbank currently has twenty-six (26) parks which encompasses 731.85 acres of developed parkland and open space.

3.3 SECTION THREE: NEEDS ASSESSMENT

PARK NAME PARK TYPE ACRES
Compass Tree Park Pocket 0.25
Earthwalk Park Pocket 0.53
Maple Street Playground Pocket 0.40
Santa Anita Playlot Pocket 0.34
Five Points Art Monument Pocket 0.50
Abraham Lincoln Park Neighborhood 2.50
Bel Aire Ball Field Neighborhood 1.75
Larry L. Maxam Memorial Park Neighborhood 5.29
Miller School Park (aka Joaquin Miller
Park)
Joint Use-School District 1.60
Mountain View Park Neighborhood 2.48
Palm Ball Field Neighborhood 1.50
Robert E. Gross Park Neighborhood 4.85
Robert E. Lundigan Park Neighborhood 1.32
Robert R. Ovrom Park Neighborhood 1.40
Valley Park Neighborhood 4.44
Vickroy Park Neighborhood 1.40
Whitnall Highway Park North Neighborhood 4.50
Whitnall Highway Park South Neighborhood 4.40
Brace Canyon Park Community 20.05
George Izay Park Community 15.36
Johnny Carson Park Community 17.62
McCambridge Park Community 17.80
Ralph Foy Park Community 10.00
Verdugo Park Community 8.00
Stough Canyon Park Regional 103.57
Wildwood Canyon Park Regional 500.00
TOTAL ACREAGE: 731.85
49 | City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan
3 Based on the park acreage identified and the City’s 2023 population of 105,357 the city currently has:

6.95 acres of developed parkland and open space per 1,000 residents The Burbank2035 General Plan states that parkland standards goal should provide the following ratios of parkland per 1,000 residents by park type:

Although Burbank maintains more than 6.95 acres of parkland for every 1,000 residents, most of this is in the form of undeveloped open space in the regional parks, Stough Canyon Park (100 acres) and Wildwood Canyon Park (500 acres). If we consider only the developed portion of the regional parks, and as well as the future/planned parks, community gardens, and the stand-alone recreation facilities as listed below:

Park Type
Pocket Parks
Neighborhood Parks
Community Parks
Regional Parks

0.04 Acres/1,000

1.50 Acres/1,000

2.00 Acres/1,000

8.00 Acres/1,000

0.02 Acres/1,000

0.36 Acres/1,000

0.84 Acres/1,000

5.73 Acres/1,000
General Plan Goal Current Standard
Park/Facility Name
Stough Canyon Park
Wildwood Canyon Park
Dick Clark Dog Park
Hollywood Way/Clark Community Garden
Chandler/Pass Community Garden
The Colony Theatre (aka Burbank Center Stage)
Stough Canyon Nature Center
Additional Park Acreage:

Regional
Regional
Future Planned
Future Planned
Community Garden
Arts Venue
Nature Center

5.30 6.00

4.80 0.36

0.25 0.26

0.33 17.30
Park/Facility Type Developable
Acreage
There is a total of 145.58 acres of developed parkland. This calculation of the parkland acreage ratio would be:

1.38 acres of developed parkland per 1,000 Burbank residents City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan | 50
Additional Parkland
The DeBell Public Golf Course (113 acres) is not counted in the City’s parkland acreage since the facility is a pay-to-play and not open to the general public, however this public golf course greatly contributes to the park and recreation opportunities available to Burbank residents.

In addition, partnerships and joint use agreements are not included in the acreage analysis since the land is not city-owned. The city currently has a 16-year agreement with the Burbank Unified School District to utilize some of their sports fields and classrooms for programming. Several private businesses offer contract services with the city to provide recreation program opportunities in their facility/building.

Additional Open Space
As discussed in the Burbank2025 General Plan, the City of Burbank has over 2,000 acres of open space located primarily in the Verdugo Mountains. This acreage connects to approximately 60,000 acres of additional open space managed by the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy. This connection provides for large contiguous areas of natural habitat for many plant and animal species. These natural open space areas also contain miles of trails and fire roads that can be used for passive recreation purposes, such as hiking, biking, and picnicking.

In summary, although the General Plan parkland acreage goals are not being met, there are additional lands not included that contribute to the city’s overall park and open space available for recreation. There is little vacant land in the city that is available to acquire for new parks. The city is encouraged to preserve the current open space, parks, and recreation facility inventory and continue to renovate and expand current recreation facilities and amenities to best serve the community needs.

Photo by the City of Burbank
51 | City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan
3 Photo by the City of Burbank
City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan | 52
Park Service Area Gap Analysis
In addition to providing appropriate
quantities and types of recreation facilities,
the City of Burbank strives to provide them
in useful and appropriate locations. The
service area gap analysis examines how
parks are distributed throughout residential
areas in the City.

Pocket Parks
5 Min
Walk
10 Min
Walk
15 Min
Walk

9.0% of
population

22.4% of
population

34.6% of
population
9,505
people
23,620
people
36,476
people
“Everyone deserves a park
within walking distance of their
home.”
-NRPA (National Recreation and Parks
Association)
Proximity to parks is more than a
convenience issue. It helps to establish
an excellent park system by providing
improved air quality, circulation, and
overall improved community health and
wellness. One-half (.5) mile is approximately
a 10-15-minute walk for most people. Most
residences should be within one-half mile
of a neighborhood park or amenity that
satisfy common recreation needs.

The 5-10-15 minute walk map outlines the
service availability around the existing
parks that are available to Burbank
residents. The service area boundaries
also reflect the physical obstructions to
pedestrian travel created by arterial
roadways, freeways, etc. which limit
easy access to parks and are reflected
by truncated shapes in the service areas
shown on exhibits 3.4-1 to 3.4-4.

Copyright © 1995–2024 Esri.

All rights reserved.

Exhibit 3.4-1: Service Area Gap
Analysis for Pocket Parks
Pocket Parks Walking Radius
5 Minutes
10 Minutes
15 Minutes

3.4 SECTION THREE: NEEDS ASSESSMENT
Exhibit 3.4-2: Service Area Gap
Analysis for Neighborhood Parks
53 | City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan
3 Copyright © 1995–2024 Esri.

All rights reserved.

Copyright © 1995–2024 Esri.

All rights reserved.

Neighborhood Parks
5 Min
Walk
10 Min
Walk
15 Min
Walk

15.7% of
population

44.7% of
population

66.9% of
population
16,567
people
47,142
people
70,514
people
Community Parks
5 Min
Walk
10 Min
Walk
15 Min
Walk

2.2% of
population

10.4% of
population

26.2% of
population
2,286
people
10,975
people
27,559
people
Exhibit 3.4-2: Service Area Gap
Analysis for Neighborhood Parks
Exhibit 3.4-3: Service Area Gap
Analysis for Community Parks
Neighborhood Parks Walking Radius Community Parks Walking Radius 5 Minutes 5 Minutes
10 Minutes 10 Minutes
15 Minutes 15 Minutes
City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan | 54
Exhibit 3.4-4:

Park Service Area Gap Analysis Map
Pocket Parks Walking Radius
5 Minutes
10 Minutes
15 Minutes
Neighborhood Parks Walking Radius
5 Minutes
10 Minutes
15 Minutes
Community Parks Walking Radius
5 Minutes
10 Minutes
15 Minutes
Regional Parks Walking Radius
5 Minutes
10 Minutes
15 Minutes
#1#1
#7#7
#4#4
#6#6
#5#5
#2#2
#3#3
#8#8 Copyright © 1995–2024 Esri.

All rights reserved.

SECTION THREE: NEEDS ASSESSMENT
55 | City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan
3 Considering all City parks, 92% of Burbank residents live within a 15-minute walk of a park.

To analyze the distribution of existing City parks, a service area radius map is created for City-owned pocket, neighborhood, and community parks (see exhibit 3.4-1 to 3.4-3).

When areas zoned for residential use fall outside of these service area designations, they are identified as an underserved neighborhood or “gap area”. The City has excellent coverage providing park space that is geographically distributed throughout the community. There are however some gaps as identified in exhibit 3.4-4. #1
#2
#3
&
#4
#5
#6
#7
#8
A portion of a residential area north of N. Glenoaks Blvd. and south of Scott Rd. falls within this gap area. This neighborhood is comprised of large single family detached homes on about 6,000 SF (0.13 acres) of land. Brace Canyon Park is just under ½ miles away at the edge of the park service area. This area is built out and does not support development of new parkland.

Burbank Hills private gated community is located in this park service gap area. This area consists of large single family detached homes on about 8,000 SF to 16,000 SF (0.18 to 0.36 acres) of land. The neighborhood has private tennis courts and an open play area to support these residents.

Small portions of non-gated residential areas are included in this service gap area. These homes are located in the high foothills of the Verdugo Mountains.

Surrounded by natural open space these homes sit on approximately 8,000 SF to 16,000 SF (0.18 to 0.36 acres) of land. If development were to expand in this area new parkland would be required.

A portion of a residential area northeast of the 5 Freeway near Cypress Ave. is in this service gap area. This neighborhood is comprised of large single family detached homes as well as medium and high-density residential areas. This area is built out and does not support development of new parkland. There are adjacent school facilities in this area including Emerson Elementary, John Muir Middle and Burbank High Schools that may in part serve some recreational value.

Located in central Burbank along W. Chandler Blvd. this gap area includes single family detached homes on about 7,000 SF (0.16 acres) of land. This area is built out and does not support development of new parkland. The Chandler Bikeway trail connects this area to near by parks and facilities such as Thomas Edison Elementary and Whitnall Highway Park North.

The residential neighborhood west of N. Clybourn Ave. is in this park service gap area. The nearest facility is over ½ mile away (Mary Alvord Recreation Center). This area is built out and does not support development of new parkland.

A portion of a residential area south of the Ventura Freeway and west of W. Olive Ave. is located in this service gap area. This neighborhood is comprised of large single family detached homes on about 8,000 SF (0.18 acres) of land. This area is built out and does not support development of new parkland.

City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan | 56
Local Trends Analysis
When analyzing the recreation trends for
the City of Burbank we began with a high-
level analysis of visitation information for
local parks through the use of Unacast
visitation data for January to December
2023. The analysis of visitation data
provides valuable insights into the usage
patterns of the city’s parks. Understanding
the most visited parks, peak visitation
times, average length of stay, and
park sphere of influence can guide the
development of maintenance strategies
and recreation programs to effectively
meet community needs. These insights are
crucial for making informed recreation
development recommendations and
ensure the continued satisfaction and
well-being of park visitors.
“Custom location data aims to
revolutionize efficient resource
allocation and optimized city
planning.”
-Unacast Success Stories Collection
Based on the average number of visitors
per week for 2023, the top 5 most visited
parks are:
• Verdugo Park -
Average Visitors: 6,000
• Brace Canyon Park -
Average Visitors: 4,500
• Ralph Foy Park -
Average Visitors: 3,524
• Johnny Carson Park -
Average Visitors: 3,350
• Larry L. Maxam Memorial Park -
Average Visitors: 2,850

3.5 SECTION THREE: NEEDS ASSESSMENT
In summary, the city’s parks are divided
up into four park classifications including
regional parks, community parks,
neighborhood parks, and pocket parks.

In reviewing the visitor length of stay in
a park, there is a range of 42 minutes
to 1.5 hours per visit. In comparison, the
average distance people travel to visit the
parks, is 2.3 to 4.5 miles, there is evidence
visitors generally travel somewhat longer
distances to visit community parks. Visitors
also tend to spend more time in community
parks compared to all other parks. When
looking at the number of visitors per park,
community parks have a significantly
higher visitation rate than all other parks.

Photo by the City of Burbank
Recreation Swim
57 | City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan
3 Pocket Parks
Average Distance
Traveled
Average Visitation
Length
Average Visitors
per Week

2.60 Miles

43.50 Minutes
2,912
People
Copyright © 1995–2024 Esri.

All rights reserved.

Exhibit 3.5-1: Average Distance
Traveled for Pocket Parks
Copyright © 1995–2024 Esri.

All rights reserved.

Neighborhood Parks

2.38 Miles

69.12 Minutes
13,347
People
Exhibit 3.5-2: Average Distance
Traveled for Neighborhood Parks
Average Distance
Traveled
Average Visitation
Length
Average Visitors
per Week
City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan | 58
Regional Parks

4.50 Miles

69.00 Minutes
4,435
People
Average Distance
Traveled
Average Visitation
Length
Average Visitors
per Week
Copyright © 1995–2024 Esri.

All rights reserved.

Exhibit 3.5-4: Average Distance
Traveled for Regional Parks
SECTION THREE: NEEDS ASSESSMENT
Copyright © 1995–2024 Esri.

All rights reserved.

Community Parks

3.58 Miles

87.17 Minutes
22,224
People
Exhibit 3.5-3: Average Distance
Traveled for Community Parks
Average Distance
Traveled
Average Visitation
Length
Average Visitors
per Week
59 | City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan
3 Exhibit 3.5-5: Average Distance
Traveled for All Parks
Copyright © 1995–2024 Esri.

All rights reserved.

Community Parks
Neighborhood Parks
Pocket Parks
Regional Parks
Burbank parks are not only popular among the city residents, but also attract regular visitors from up to 2 miles outside the city limits. The parks vary in size, location, quality of facilities, and events, which make them successful and appealing to a larger community.

The increased recreation traffic and extended community influence has opportunities to generate benefits for local businesses and retailers.

City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan | 60
Custom Park Standards Calculations
A key element in any planning strategy is an understanding of the nature of “demand” for parks and recreation facilities. This report assesses the demand for recreation facilities by the participants of organized sports within Burbank, and participation data from the statistically valid, multimodal community survey. Without this understanding, a policy can only be based on general standards of supply and demand, such as population ratios (acres per thousand population) or service area (distance to a park). Such standards are useful guides lacking specific detailed planning and assessment.

A questionnaire was designed and distributed to the organized sports groups that use the City facilities. The questionnaire was distributed by the City staff and thirty-nine (39) sports organizations responded. The information regarding the number of players, size of teams, seasonality and turnover of facilities for both games and practice are used to better define peak day demand and convert that to the number of facilities required to meet the needs of this segment of the recreation market. The questionnaire addresses the percentage of the players in each organization that live within the City of Burbank.

This varies widely by type of sport and in Burbank, reflects that a number of participants in certain sports reside outside of the City.

The Custom Park Standards Calculations (CPSCs) for the City of Burbank are based on the 2023 Claritas estimated population level of 105,357 and participation data gathered in the sports organization survey and multimodal survey. The CPSCs provide an estimate of the number of facilities or ‘demand’ required to accommodate peak day demand in the context of the local design standards. The local facility design is based on the information received from the sports organizations identifying the number of players, team size, and facility turnover for each facility type. The CPSC Methodology is illustrated in exhibit 3.6-1.
“The 2024 NRPA Agency Performance Review does not present park and recreation “standards”, nor do the benchmarks represent any standards against which every individual park and recreation agency should measure itself. The reason for this is simple: there is not a single set of standards for parks and recreation because different agencies serve different communities that have unique needs, desires and challenges.

Agencies also have diverse funding mechanisms.”
- 2024 NRPA Agency Performance Review

3.6 SECTION THREE: NEEDS ASSESSMENT
61 | City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan
3 To provide an additional comparison of the Burbank Local Needs, a comparison of the 2023 NRPA Benchmark facility report is provided in exhibit 3.6-2. The comparison illustrates how each City is unique in its recreation patterns. The City should not rely solely on benchmarking.

Exhibit 3.6-2 below uses the 2024 NRPA Benchmark data to compare with the City of Burbank’s existing inventory. The NRPA National Standard is used to calculate the NRPA Facility Need for Burbank using the City of Burbank’s 2023 population of 105,357. *NRPA does not distinguish youth or adult baseball / softball “diamond” fields. **NRPA does not distinguish youth or adult soccer / football “rectangular” fields.

Exhibit 3.6-2:

Local Needs vs. NRPA Needs
Facility Local CPSC Facility
Need Ratio for All
Players
Local
Facility
Need
NRPA National
Standard
(100,000 to 250,000
population)
NRPA
Facility
Need
Baseball Field (adult)* 1/15,734 6.7 1/6,821 15.4
Baseball Field (youth)* 1/29,365 3.6 1/6,821 15.4
Basketball Court (indoor) 1/42,472 2.5 1/77,099 1.4
Football Field (youth)** 1/52,679 2.0 1/7,375 14.3
Soccer Field (adult)** 1/21,558 4.9 1/7,375 14.3
Soccer Field (youth)** 1/18,941 5.6 1/7,375 14.3
Softball Field (adult)* 1/26,357 4.0 1/6,821 15.4
Softball Field (youth)* 1/118,527 0.9 1/6,821 15.4
Volleyball (outdoor) 1/68,506 1.5 1/46,517 2.3
Exhibit 3.6-1: CPSC Methodology for
Sports Organizations
City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan | 62
Baseball (adult) Summary:

Basketball (indoor) Summary:

The following illustrations identify the
sports needs along with facilities available
and were evaluated as part of the local
CPSC’s for Burbank. Existing facilities are
compared to the local needs and surplus
/ deficit calculations are presented for
current (2023) as well as future (2033)
demand needs. It is important to note
that the needs in this section are based
on organized sport data and does not
take into account additional unstructured
recreation desires (pickup games /
non organized sports programs) by the
community. When assessing these needs,
this information is considered in the
development of the recommendations.

All field and court needs are being fulfilled
through a surplus of adult facilities as well
as the joint use agreement with Burbank
Unified School District.

NOTE: Per City policy, baseball and softball
fields are multi-use and considered ‘ball
fields’. Football and soccer fields are multi-
use and considered ‘multi-use fields’.

Total Facilities Available
Current Needs
Current Surplus / Deficit
Future Needs
Future Surplus / Deficit

1.0 6.7
-5.7

6.8 -5.8
Total Facilities Available
Current Needs
Current Surplus / Deficit
Future Needs
Future Surplus / Deficit

3.0 2.5

0.5 2.5

0.5 Baseball (youth) Summary:

Total Facilities Available
Current Needs
Current Surplus / Deficit
Future Needs
Future Surplus / Deficit

0.0 3.6
-3.6

3.7 -3.7
The City has a current need for 3.6 youth
baseball fields.

There are no City youth fields, however
there is one (1) school youth field at
Burbank High School.

The remaining deficit of 2.6 fields can
be supported by utilizing the surplus of
youth softball fields.

The City has a current need for 2.5
indoor basketball courts.

There are three (3) indoor City courts
available at Mary Alvord Recreation
Center, McCambridge Recreation
Center, and the Olive Recreation
Center to support this demand.

The City has a surplus of 0.5 indoor
basketball courts.

SECTION THREE: NEEDS ASSESSMENT
The City has a current need for 6.7 adult
baseball fields.

There is one (1) lit existing City adult
field at Ralph Foy Park as well as one
(1) school adult field at John Burroughs
High.

The remaining deficit of 4.7 fields can
be supported by utilizing the surplus of
adult softball fields.
63 | City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan
3 Soccer (youth) Summary:Soccer (adult) Summary:

Softball (adult) Summary:Football Summary:

Total Facilities Available
Current Needs
Current Surplus / Deficit
Future Needs
Future Surplus / Deficit

11.0 4.0

7.0 4.1

6.9 Total Facilities Available*
Current Needs
Current Surplus / Deficit
Future Needs
Future Surplus / Deficit

0.0 2.0
-2.0

2.0 -2.0
Total Facilities Available*
Current Needs
Current Surplus / Deficit
Future Needs
Future Surplus / Deficit
Total Facilities Available*
Current Needs
Current Surplus / Deficit
Future Needs
Future Surplus / Deficit

0.0 5.6
-5.6

5.7 -5.7

0.0 4.9
-4.9

5.0 -5.0
The City has a current need for 5.6 youth
soccer fields.

There are no City youth soccer fields,
however there are twenty-one (21)
school youth fields.

The demand is being met through school
facilities. Without a joint use agreement,
the City would find itself in a deficit
situation.

Note: There are three (3) “overlay” fields in
the City at Larry L. Maxam Memorial Park,
Palm Ball Field, and Ralph Foy Park. These
overlay fields are only suitable for practice
and do not meet the City’s needs.

The City has a current need for 2 youth
football fields.

There are no existing City football fields
available, however there are two (2)
adult fields available at Burbank High
School and John Burroughs High School.

The demand is being met through
school facilities. Without a joint use
agreement, the City would find itself in
a deficit situation.

The City has a current need for 4.9 adult
soccer fields.

There are no City adult soccer fields,
however there are twelve (12) school
adult fields.

The demand is being met through school
facilities. Without a joint use agreement,
the City would find itself in a deficit
situation.

Note: There are three (3) “overlay” fields in
the City at Larry L. Maxam Memorial Park,
Palm Ball Field, and Ralph Foy Park. These
overlay fields are only suitable for practice
and do not meet the City’s needs.

The City has a current need for 4 adult
softball fields.

There are eleven (11) City adult softball
fields available to meet this need.

The 7 surplus fields can be utilized
to support the deficit found in adult
baseball fields.

City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan | 64
Volleyball Summary:Softball (youth) Summary:

Total Facilities Available
Current Needs
Current Surplus / Deficit
Future Needs
Future Surplus / Deficit

3.0 0.9

2.1 0.9

2.1 Total Facilities Available
Current Needs
Current Surplus / Deficit
Future Needs
Future Surplus / Deficit

3.0 1.5

1.5 1.6

1.4 Burbank Adult Baseball
Photo by the City of Burbank
The City has a current need for 0.9 youth
softball field.

There are three (3) City youth fields
available to meet this demand.

The 2 surplus fields can be utilized to
support the deficit found in youth
baseball fields.

The City has a current need for 1.5
indoor volleyball court.

There are three (3) indoor City courts
available located at Mary Alvord
Recreation Center, McCambridge
Recreation Center, and Olive
Recreation Center.

The City has a surplus of 1.5 indoor
volleyball courts.
65 | City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan
3 Community Center Summary:

Swimming (recreational) Summary:
12,432 SF
23,647 SF
-11,215 SF
Total Facilities Available
Current Needs
Current Surplus / Deficit
Total Facilities Available
Current Needs
Current Surplus / Deficit
20,588 SF
9,614 SF
10,974 SF
The Custom Park Standards Calculations
for swimming and community centers are
based on the 2023 population level in the
City of Burbank of 105,357. The per capita
participation is based on the information
received from the 2024 statistically-valid,
multimodal community survey identifying
the annual participation for each facility
type. The facility need ratio for each
type of facility is calculated by dividing
the total population by the number of
facilities demanded. The City should
continue to evaluate growth or decline
in recreational activities when prioritizing
new development.

The City has 2 pools overall. The total
square feet (SF) available in the 2 pools
is approximately 20,588 SF. A pool is
commonly calculated at 6,150 SF of
water therefore the available facilities
are calculated as 3.3 or 20,588 SF.

Recreational swim needs are satisfied
with these facilities.

This calculation is for recreation swim
and does not include competitive swim.

The City has several community center
facilities. After a review of all the
available rooms to be programmed
with community classes and events
(excluding gymnasium space, offices,
equipment rooms, etc.) there is
approximately 12,432 SF of “public”
community center space.

The City has a need for 23,647 SF
of community center space. For
comparison, the Olive Recreation
Center has 4,043 SF of community
center space (excluding the lobby,
offices, and the gymnasium totaling
8,303 SF) would be comparable to 1
community center.

The city has a deficit of 11,215 SF
of community center space. This
would translate to an additional 2.7
community centers like the size of the
Olive Recreation Center excluding
offices, lobby, and the gymnasium.

Photo by the City of Burbank
Youth Learn to Swim Class
City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan | 66
Copyright © 1995–2024 Esri.

All rights reserved.

School Facilities
The City of Burbank is
served by the Burbank
Unified School District
with eleven elementary
schools, three middle
schools, and three
high schools. These
are shown in exhibit

3.7-1.

Exhibit 3.7-1:

School Facilities Map

3.7 SECTION THREE: NEEDS ASSESSMENT
67 | City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan
3 Joint Use Agreements
The Joint Use Agreement between the City of Burbank and the Burbank Unified School District (BUSD) establishes a cooperative framework for the shared use and management of sports fields and other facilities. Through this agreement, both parties maximize the use of public resources, ensuring that school fields, such as those at Burbank High School and John Burroughs High School, serve both educational and recreational purposes.

The agreement guarantees that the City has access to these fields for a minimum of 150 days per year, allowing the City to organize and conduct community recreational programs without interrupting the schools’ primary educational functions. Annually, the City and BUSD coordinate their facility needs through a “Master Calendar”, which sets a year-long schedule for the use of shared spaces, balancing the demands of school activities with the community’s recreation needs.

However, conflicts in scheduling or unanticipated school events can sometimes limit the City’s access to these fields. The agreement allows both parties to adjust the Master Calendar as needed, with the understanding that certain school functions, such as tournaments or special events take priority.

Photo by https://www.burbankusd.org/Page/1
Robert Louis Stevenson Elementary School
City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan | 68
Fitness Studios and Gyms
Burbank is home to a variety of fitness studios and
gyms that cater to different workout preferences,
offering a diverse range of exercise programs
and training styles like Blink Fitness, Club Pilates, F4 Training, Orange Theory Fitness, and Pilates Plus.

Each of these studios brings something unique to
the fitness offerings in Burbank, with offerings that
range from traditional gym workouts to specialized
training.

Batcade Batting Cages
Batcade is a long-standing batting cage facility
located in Burbank, known for serving the local
community since the 1990s. It offers various
pitching speeds to accommodate players of all
skill levels. In addition to the batting cages, the
facility includes a small arcade and pizza place. Its
location, close to popular areas in Burbank, makes
it a convenient stop for locals and visitors alike.

Other Parks and Recreation Facilities Open to the Public Additional recreation facilities exist around and within the City of Burbank. These facilities also provide recreation opportunities to the community. Such facilities are important to identify so not to duplicate City facilities in areas that may already be served through non-city owned recreational opportunities. The following are parks and facilities that have been identified in this category:

Photo by https://locations.blinkfitness.com/
ca/burbank/1060-west-alameda-avenue
Photo by https://burbankbatcade.com/
batting-cages

3.8 SECTION THREE: NEEDS ASSESSMENT
Martial Arts Studios
Burbank offers a diverse range of martial arts
experiences through different studios. Inspire
Martial Arts and Fitness offers Taekwondo, Brazilian
Jiu-Jitsu, and fitness kickboxing for both kids and
adults. Rumble Boxing is a high-energy fitness
studio offering group boxing-inspired workouts that
combine cardio, strength training, and conditioning.

Swordplay Fencing Studio specializes in fencing,
offering classes for all ages and experience levels.

Photo by https://mawofla.com/fitness-kick-
boxing-in-person-classes-burbank/
69 | City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan
3 LA Kings Ice at Pickwick Gardens
LA Kings Ice at Pickwick Gardens is a popular ice
skating facility offering a variety of ice sports and
recreational activities. The rink is affiliated with the NHL’s LA Kings and provides opportunities for public
skating, figure skating, and youth and adult hockey
programs. The facility features a full-sized ice rink,
hosting lessons, leagues, and events.

Photo by https://www.lakingsicepickwick.
com/youth-hockey
Photo by the City of Burbank
Round 1 Bowling and Amusement
Located in the Burbank Town Center, Round 1
Bowling and Amusement features state-of-the-art
bowling lanes, arcade games, billiards, karaoke
rooms, and more, making it a popular destination
for families, friends, and groups looking for a full
day of entertainment.

Los Angeles Equestrian Center
The Los Angeles Equestrian Center is dedicated
to all things equestrian, offering a wide range of
services for horse enthusiasts of all levels. Located
near Griffith Park, this 75-acre complex features
state-of-the-art facilities, including multiple
arenas, barns, and stables. It caters to western as
well as english riders and both casual riders and
professional equestrians with training programs,
boarding services, and equestrian events.

Photo by https://www.round1usa.com/
activities
Photo by https://thelaec.com/our-story
City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan | 70
SECTION THREE: NEEDS ASSESSMENT
Gordon R. Howard Museum
Adjacent to George Izay Park, two structures
comprise the museum complex, the Gordon R.

Howard Museum and the Mentzer House. Named
in honor of the valued benefactor, Gordon R.

Howard, the bulk of the society’s collection is
housed in this 20,000 square foot facility. Most
items in the complex have been donated, except
for those on loan. The Burbank Historical Society
and the Museum are run by non-paid volunteers.

Mentzer House
Built in 1887, this restored, framed Victorian house,
was built by the Providencia Land, Water and
Development Company. The Mentzer House was
originally built near Palm Avenue and 6th Street,
then was moved to 321 E. Orange Grove around
1920, before it was moved to its current resting
place on Olive Avenue in 1977.

Garry Marshall Theatre
The Garry Marshall Theatre is a renowned nonprofit
performing arts venue that can seat around 130
people and offers plays, musicals, and comedy
shows. Named after the legendary director,
producer, and writer Garry Marshall, the theater
was established to continue his legacy of fostering
creativity and storytelling in the performing arts.

The theater also runs educational programs and
workshops for both children and adults.

Photo by https://www.burbankhistoricalsoc.
org/museum-complex
Photo by https://www.burbankhistoricalsoc.
org/museum-complex
Photo by https://www.garrymarshalltheatre.
org/about
Photo by the City of Burbank
71 | City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan
3 Photo by https://www.garrymarshalltheatre.
org/about
City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan | 72
Photo by the City of Burbank
73 | City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan
4 4.1
Key Strategy #1: Develop multi-use sports complexes that maximize space efficiency, provide flexible scheduling, and
promote inclusive programming for all age groups.

Key Strategy #2: Implement aquatic center improvements with diverse water features, swim programs, and spaces for both
competitive athletes and casual swimmers.

Key Strategy #3: Adopt a comprehensive park enhancement plan that prioritizes eco-friendly practices, modernizes
amenities, and ensures inclusive access for all
community members, including those with disabilities.

Key Strategy #4: Create interconnected greenways with walking loops that link parks and trails to accessible transit options and parking, promoting sustainable mobility and
outdoor recreation.

Key Strategy #5: Create a versatile cultural hub that offers adaptable spaces for performances, exhibitions, and
community-driven programs, fostering creative
expression and cultural engagement.

Key Strategy #6: Expand diverse programming that provides tailored activities for both seniors and youth, encouraging
active engagement and community growth.

The recommendations developed herein are founded in the desires and needs for recreation opportunities identified by the Burbank community outreach conducted as part of this City Parks Master Plan. Specific recommendations are broken down into the six key strategies that will advance the development of parks and recreation for the entire community.

Key Strategies
Each of the following recommended key strategies are designed to balance the equation of where exiting recreation resources exist and how they relate to the needs of the community.

SECTION FOUR:

RECOMMENDATIONS
City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan | 74
Existing Conditions:
• The City has three (3) locations for
overlay soccer fields at Larry L. Maxam
Memorial Park, Palm Ball Field, and
Ralph Foy Park. Overlay fields are
shared by other fields and not suitable
for game schedules. The City is currently
reliant on the school district to support
the soccer demands in the community.

Community Voice:
• Adding more soccer field desires
were recorded in the staff focus
group, multimodal survey, workshop
1, workshop 2, workshop 3, and the
feedback comments.
• Community desires included: “soccer
fields”, “need for soccer fields”, “youth
soccer fields”, “soccer facilities”, “there
is no soccer fields”, “actual soccer
fields”, “sports field for soccer”, and
“especially soccer fields”.
• The CPSCs identify a current need for 4.9
adult soccer fields and 5.6 youth soccer
fields.
• Exhibit 4.1-1 illustrates the location of the
respondents that indicated a desire for
adding more soccer fields.

Goal 1.1: “Soccer Fields”
The City should prioritize developing
soccer fields to meet community needs, as
use of school district fields are unsecured
and contingent to school priorities.

Exhibit 4.1-1:

Soccer Fields Survey Results
Copyright © 1995–2024 Esri.

All rights reserved.

Recommendations:
• The City should look to developing
soccer fields suitable to supporting the
community needs. Utilizing partnerships
with school districts is a proven strategy
to supplement field shortages. It is not
often used to fully support a large need.

Conflicts in scheduling or unanticipated
school events can limit the City’s
access to these fields.

Key Strategy #1: Develop multi-use sports
complexes that maximize space efficiency, provide
flexible scheduling, and promote inclusive programming
for all age groups.

Multimodal Survey
Feedback Survey
Workshop #1
Workshop #2
Workshop #3
75 | City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan
4 Existing Conditions:
• The City currently has 4 dedicated
pickleball courts at Larry L. Maxam
Memorial Park and 8 overlay courts at
George Izay Park.

Community Voice:
• Desires for adding more pickleball
courts were recorded in the staff focus
group, multimodal survey, workshop
1, workshop 2, and the feedback
comments.
• Community desires included:
“pickleball court management”,
“more pickleball”, “recreational
facilities – pickleball”, “pickleball
courts”, “weekend pickleball”, “tennis/
pickleball”, “pickleball - dedicated”,
“expanding the pickleball”, “add
pickleball”, and “permanent
pickleball”.
• Exhibit 4.1-2 illustrates the location of
the respondents that indicated a desire
for adding more pickleball courts.

Goal 1.2: “Pickleball Courts”
The City should develop additional
pickleball courts in groupings of 4-8,
allowing flexibility for lessons, scheduling,
and tournament play.

Exhibit 4.1-2:

Pickleball Courts Survey Results
Copyright © 1995–2024 Esri.

All rights reserved.

Recommendations:
• The City should develop additional
pickleball courts. As a best practice the
City should look at developing courts
in groupings of 4-8 (the size of two
tennis courts) to allow for flexibility in
developing lessons, hosting round robin
tournament events, and tournament
play.

Multimodal Survey
Feedback Survey
Workshop #1
Workshop #2
City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan | 76
Existing Conditions:

Recommendations:
• Burbank offers a variety of youth
sports programs, including leagues for
basketball, volleyball, soccer, baseball,
softball, flag football, and roller hockey,
as well as individual activities like golf and
martial arts.
• Additional opportunities include
skateboarding and BMX at Valley Skate
Park, swimming, and multi-sport programs
through Break Through Sports Academy
and Amazing Athletes & Tots.
• Attendance increased from 2020 to 2023
by more than 8,800 participants in team
sports and leagues.
• The City should expand the range of
youth sports offerings, particularly in
high-demand areas such as baseball,
volleyball, and softball.
• Prioritize the development of new facilities
to support growing participation in youth
sports.
• Strengthen collaborations with programs
like Break Through Sports Academy and
Amazing Athletes & Tots to offer diverse
and comprehensive youth sports options.
• The City should collaborate with local
youth sports leagues, such as Little League
and AYSO to evaluate opportunities
and joint efforts to respond and fulfill the
community’s desire for more youth sports
programs.

Community Voice:
• Desires for adding more youth sports were
recorded in the stakeholder interviews,
staff focus group, workshop 1, workshop 3,
and the feedback comments.
• Community desires included: “youth
sports”, “baseball” “volleyball” “softball”
• Exhibit 4.1-3 illustrates the location of the
respondents that indicated a desire for
adding more youth sports.

Goal 1.3: “Youth Sports”
Expand youth sports offerings, particularly
in high-demand areas like baseball,
volleyball, and soccer, by developing new
facilities and collaborating with programs
to meet community needs.

Copyright © 1995–2024 Esri.

All rights reserved.

Exhibit 4.1-3:

Youth Sports Survey Results
Feedback Survey
Workshop #1
Workshop #3
Key Strategy #1: Develop multi-use sports
complexes that maximize space efficiency, provide
flexible scheduling, and promote inclusive programming
for all age groups.
77 | City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan
4 Photo by the City of Burbank
City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan | 78
Key Strategy #2: Implement aquatic center
improvements with diverse water features, swim
programs, and spaces for both competitive athletes
and casual swimmers.

Existing Conditions:

Recommendations:
• The City currently has 2 pools and one
spray play facility at Verdugo Aquatic
Facility and one pool at McCambridge
Park. Verdugo Aauatic Facility is open
year-round.
• The City offers many aquatic classes,
aquatic sports, lap swim, and recreation
swim.
• A pool is commonly calculated at 6,150
SF. The City has an available 20,588 SF of
available swimming facilities.
• Burbank offers competitive swim programs
through various teams, including the
Golden Road Aquatics, the BLAST Sharks,
and the Riptide Swim Team from the
Burbank Community YMCA.
• City should collaborate with the local
competitive programs, the YMCA,
and other contract aquatics program
providers (e.g. Breakthrough Sports)
to identify and review barriers to
participation and to identify solutions to
meet community demand. Options to
explore and questions to address include:
◦ Are fees a barrier to participation?
◦ Are aquatic programs operating at
capacity? If capacity is a concern,
the City should consider expanding
the hours at the McCambridge Pool.

Community Voice:
• Desires for aquatic classes and facility
improvements were recorded in the
stakeholder interviews, staff focus
group, workshop 2, workshop 3, and the
multimodal survey.
• Community desires included: “pool
upgrades”, “pool”, “swimming”,
“competitive swimming”, “swim”, and
“swimming class / competitive swim”.
• Exhibit 4.1-4 illustrates the location of the
respondents that indicated a desire for
swimming pool improvements, swimming
classes, and competitive swim.

Goal 2.1: “Swimming Pool Improvements
/ Swimming Classes / Competitive Swim”
Collaborate with local providers to address
participation barriers, capacity, and
explore expanded use of McCambridge
Pool.

Copyright © 1995–2024 Esri.

All rights reserved.

Exhibit 4.1-4: Pool Improvements / Swimming
/ Competitive Swim Survey Results
Multimodal Survey
Workshop #2
Workshop #3
79 | City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan
4 Existing Conditions:

Recommendations:
• The City has an existing splash pad /
wading pool at the Verdugo Aquatic
Facility at Verdugo Park.
• Splash pads can be designed in various
styles from small water elements in
playgrounds to larger water park type
apparatus. The City should now look
to implement smaller elements that
do not require such significant capital
costs, and when shutdown, do not
negatively impact the playability or
visibility of a park. Consider developing
small playground / plaza mister level
equipment that have no standing water
but do allow for limited aquatic type
play.

Community Voice:
• Desires for a splash pad were recorded
in the stakeholder interviews, workshop
1, workshop 3, and the feedback
comments.
• Community desires included: “splash
pad”.
• Exhibit 4.1-5 illustrates the location of
the respondents that indicated a desire
for adding an additional splash pad
within the City.

Goal 2.2: “Splash Pad”
Add small, low-cost water features that
enhance playgrounds with mist-level play,
avoiding standing water and minimizing
impact on park usability.

Copyright © 1995–2024 Esri.

All rights reserved.

Exhibit 4.1-5:

Splash Pad Survey Results
Feedback Survey
Workshop #1
Workshop #3
City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan | 80
Key Strategy #3: Adopt a comprehensive park
enhancement plan that prioritizes eco-friendly practices, modernizes amenities, and ensures inclusive access for all community members, including those with disabilities.

Existing Conditions:

Recommendations:
• The Parks and Recreation Department
provides a variety of programs and
services for the community, in addition to
managing the landscape maintenance
for its parks. The department utilizes
contract vendors for routine tasks,
allowing City personnel to focus on more
complex maintenance projects. The City
of Burbank currently has twenty-six (26)
parks which encompasses 731.85 acres
of developed parkland and open space.
• Costs for park maintenance decreased in
the years following the pandemic. Today
costs have increased significantly (26% in
labor and 64% in materials, supplies and
services). This is typical with increased
community use of park facilities following
the pandemic.
• Focus maintenance improvements in
areas specific to infield maintenance on
ball diamonds, parking lots, sidewalks,
hardscape, and planter areas. Park
specific recommendations can be found
in section 4.2.
• Populate the City’s CMMS software with
scheduled, planned, and programmed
maintenance tasks to assist in the
development of a lifecycle management
program.
• Additional recommendations can be
found in the operations and maintenance
plan in the appendix.

Community Voice:
• Community desires for park maintenance
were recorded in the stakeholder
interviews, workshop 1, workshop 3, and
the feedback comments.
• Community desires included:
“maintenance”, “park maintenance”,
“poor maintenance”, “maintenance
is not happening”, and “lighting and
maintenance”.
• Exhibit 4.1-6 illustrates the location of the
respondents that indicated a desire for
park maintenance.

Goal 3.1: “Park Maintenance
Improve park maintenance by focusing
on sports fields, hardscape areas, and
planter areas, while utilizing computer
maintenance management software
(CMMS) for scheduled and planned
tasks to support a lifecycle management
program of park assets.

Copyright © 1995–2024 Esri.

All rights reserved.

Exhibit 4.1-6:

Park Maintenance Survey Results
Feedback Survey
Workshop #1
Workshop #3
81 | City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan
4 Existing Conditions:

Recommendations:
• The City of Burbank continues to help
improve the environment through
partnerships and local initiatives such
as Plant for a Greener Burbank aimed
at increasing the urban tree canopy
to improve environmental health and
enhance community spaces. This and
other goals align with Burbank’s 2035
General Plan and Greenhouse Gas
Reduction Plan to address climate
change and promote sustainability.
• Optimize irrigation systems to ensure water
conservation, including adjusting irrigation
schedules and preventing runoff.
• Continue support and development of the
Plant for a Greener Burbank initiative.
• Develop an Urban Forest Master Plan to
include a lifecycle management plan
for trees, which includes scheduled
maintenance, replacement, and proactive
care of older trees to maintain a healthy
and diverse tree population.
• Partner with local organizations such as
TreePeople and Los Angeles County to
engage the community in volunteer tree
planting and care programs. Educating
residents about the benefits of trees and
encouraging them to participate can help
sustain long-term urban forest health.

Community Voice:
• Community desires for Sustainable Park
Management were recorded in the
stakeholder interviews, workshop 1, the
multimodal survey, and the feedback
comments.
• Community desires included:
“environmental”, “open spaces”, “Native”,
“environmental advocate”, “maintain our
green area/trees”, and “increase tree
canopy”.
• Exhibit 4.1-7 illustrates the location of the
respondents that indicated a desire for
sustainable park management.

Goal 3.2: “Sustainable Park Management”
Promote sustainable park management
by developing an Urban Forest Master
Plan encouraging park conservation,
implementing a lifecycle management
plan for tree care, and partnering with
community organizations to promote
urban forest health.

Copyright © 1995–2024 Esri.

All rights reserved.

Exhibit 4.1-7: Sustainable Park
Management Survey Results
Multimodal Survey
Feedback Survey
Workshop #1
Photo by the City of Burbank
Community Tree Planting
City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan | 82
Existing Conditions:

Recommendations:
• The City has thirty-one (31) restroom
facilities at twenty-six (26) parks and
facilities. These facilities are located
throughout the City’s Neighborhood
Parks, Community Parks, Regional
Parks, and Recreation Facilities. There
are temporary restroom facilities at
Bel Aire Ball Field and Palm Ball Field.

There are no restrooms available at the
five (5) pocket parks, Abraham Lincoln
Park, Whitnall Highway Park North, and
Whitnall Highway Park South.
• Parks that see in increased visitation
should have increased restroom
cleaning operations. Operations should
be conducted during peak day usage
to minimize restrooms appearing
overused during community events.

Peak day usage per park can be found
in the trends report in the appendix.
• Consider adding prefabricated
restroom facilities at Bel Aire Ball Field
and Palm Ball Field. Abraham Lincoln
Park has access to restroom facilities in
the library on site.

Community Voice:
• Community desires for restroom facility
maintenance were recorded in the
stakeholder interviews, workshop 1,
workshop 3, the multimodal survey,
and the feedback comments.
• Community desires included: “upkeep
of restrooms”, “restrooms at all parks”,
and “clean bathrooms”.
• Exhibit 4.1-8 illustrates the location of
the respondents that indicated a desire
for restroom improvements.

Goal 3.3: “Restrooms”
Increase restroom maintenance and
availability through additional cleaning
operations during peak usage times in
parks with high visitation.

Copyright © 1995–2024 Esri.

All rights reserved.

Exhibit 4.1-8:

Restrooms Survey Results
Multimodal Survey
Feedback Survey
Workshop #1
Workshop #3
Key Strategy #3: Adopt a comprehensive park
enhancement plan that prioritizes eco-friendly practices, modernizes amenities, and ensures inclusive access for all community members, including those with disabilities.
83 | City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan
4 Existing Conditions:

Recommendations:
• The City has twenty (20) various sized
and themed playgrounds across the
City.
• Continue the playground renovation
schedule based on installation date
and life expectancy. Modifications
may be required based on equipment
use levels.
• As new playgrounds are developed
the city should include universal
playground design standards to
promote equitable play spaces for all.

Community Voice:
• Community desires for playground
improvements were recorded in
workshop 1, workshop 2, workshop
3, the multimodal survey, and the
feedback comments.
• Community desires included:
“playgrounds”, “playground
enhancement”, “playground
facilities”, “playground maintenance”,
“playground improvements”, “play
equipment”, “sand in the playgrounds”,
“playgrounds more inclusive”, “large
playground”, “needs an adventure
playground”, “accessible playground”,
“playgrounds have been closed”,
“more playgrounds”, “more swings”,
“fences around playgrounds”,
“playgrounds need updating”, “need
ample shade”, and “extended
playgrounds”.
• Exhibit 4.1-9 illustrates the location of
the respondents that indicated a desire
for playground improvements.

Goal 3.4: “Playground Improvements”
Continue the playground renovation
schedule, while incorporating universal
playground design standards for equitable
and inclusive play spaces in all new
developments.

Copyright © 1995–2024 Esri.

All rights reserved.

Exhibit 4.1-9: Playground
Improvements Survey Results
Multimodal Survey
Feedback Survey
Workshop #1
Workshop #2
Workshop #3
City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan | 84
Existing Conditions:

Recommendations:
• The City parks are understood to be
compliant with all regulatory codes
based on their instillation date, however
ease of accessibility, presented here,
is discussed in terms of park features
beyond the regulatory codes and that
of overall quality of life.
• Develop a park accessibility
improvement schedule based on
planned renovations to park facilities.

Enhancements should be considered
to include accessibility measures to
support all ages and abilities. Specific
accessibility improvements should
include: accessible pathways, inclusive
playgrounds (kids, parents, and seniors
amenities), accessible restroom
facilities, adaptive sports facilities,
shaded seating areas, accessible
drinking fountains.
• As new playgrounds are developed
the City should include universal
playground design standards to
promote equitable play spaces for all.

Community Voice:
• Community desires for accessible
playgrounds and facilities for those
with disabilities were recorded in the
stakeholder interviews, workshop 1,
and the feedback comments.
• Community desires included:
“accessibility and amenities”,
“disabled kids”, “inclusion and diversity
in community spaces”, “help for
disabled seniors”, “disabled seniors”,
and “accessibility”.
• Exhibit 4.1-10 illustrates the location of
the respondents that indicated a desire
for accessibility improvements.

Goal 3.5: “Accessible Playgrounds and
Facilities for Those with Disabilities”
Enhance park accessibility with inclusive
playgrounds, accessible facilities, and
universal design standards to create
equitable spaces for all ages and abilities.

Copyright © 1995–2024 Esri.

All rights reserved.

Exhibit 4.1-10: Accessible Playgrounds
and Facilities Survey Results
Feedback Survey
Workshop #1
Key Strategy #3: Adopt a comprehensive park
enhancement plan that prioritizes eco-friendly practices, modernizes amenities, and ensures inclusive access for all community members, including those with disabilities.
85 | City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan
4 Existing Conditions:

Recommendations:
• Currently the City does not have any
dog parks.
• The nearest dog park facility is Griffith
Park Dog Park in Los Angeles to the
southwest of Burbank, and Whitnall Off
Leash Dog Park in North Hollywood to
the east.
• Continue the construction of the Dick
Clark Dog Park.
• Create a “Friends of Dog Park”
volunteer group to assist with moderate
ongoing maintenance
Community Voice:
• Community desires for a dog park
were recorded in the Staff focus
group, workshop 1, workshop 3, the
multimodal survey, and the feedback
comments.
• Community desires included: “new
dog park”.
• Exhibit 4.1-11 illustrates the location of
the respondents that indicated a desire
for a dog park.

Goal 3.6: “Dog Park”
The City should prioritize the continued
development of the Dick Clark Dog Park.

Copyright © 1995–2024 Esri.

All rights reserved.

Exhibit 4.1-11:

Dog Park Survey Results
Multimodal Survey
Feedback Survey
Workshop #2
Workshop #3
Dick Clark Dog Park Concept Plan
City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan | 86
Key Strategy #4: Create interconnected
greenways with walking loops that link parks and trails to accessible transit options and parking, promoting
sustainable mobility and outdoor recreation.

Existing Conditions:

Recommendations:
• The City of Burbank currently has twenty-
six (26) parks, eighteen (18) recreation
facilities which encompasses 731.85
acres of developed parkland and open
space. Based on the 2023 population
of 105,357, the City currently has 6.95
acres of developed parkland and open
space per 1,000 residents. Excluding
the undeveloped open space in the
regional parks, there is a total of 145.58
acres of developed parkland. This
calculation of the parkland acreage
ratio would be: 1.38 acres of developed
parkland per 1,000 Burbank residents.
• To support the desire for more green
spaces the city should look to develop
Urban Greening Initiatives. These
initiatives may include:
◦ Repurposing underdeveloped land,
◦ Development of green corridors
(similar to Chandler Blvd),
◦ Shared multiuse spaces: combine
recreational areas with stormwater
management, outdoor markets, or
private event spaces,
◦ Public-Private Partnerships: create
or expand green spaces through
offering incentives to private
developers and businesses.
• Continue Implementation of Green
Infrastructure Treatments as defined in
the Burbank Complete Streets Plan.

Community Voice:
• Desires for more parks and green areas
were recorded in workshop 1, workshop
3, and the multimodal survey.
• Community desires included:
“green spaces”, “more parks”, and
“greenway”.
• Exhibit 4.1-12 illustrates the location of
the respondents that indicated a desire
for more parks and green areas.

Goal 4.1: “Add More Parks and Green
Areas”
Enhance urban spaces by repurposing
land, developing green corridors, and
fostering public-private partnerships
to create multiuse recreational and
environmental spaces.

Copyright © 1995–2024 Esri.

All rights reserved.

Exhibit 4.1-12: Add More Parks and
Green Areas Survey Results
Multimodal Survey
Workshop #1
Workshop #3
87 | City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan
4 Existing Conditions:

Recommendations:
• Burbank aims to enhance the quality
of life by creating a more walkable
community. The City’s bike and
pedestrian map outlines existing and
proposed trails. Some sidewalks are
currently isolated from contiguous
networks, and some streets lack
sidewalks altogether. There are eight
(8) walking/jogging loops at City parks.
• The City has an existing trail network
that includes hiking/walking trails at
Stough Canyon Trail (8.20 miles) and
Wildwood Canyon Trail (2.3 miles).
• Develop internal walkways with
emphasis on perimeter loops in existing
park areas. Consider signage and mile
markers to promote healthy living.
• Continue implementation of the Burbank
Complete Streets Plan: Goal 5 Bicycle
and Pedestrian Mobility.
• Develop trail maintenance standards
and coordinate with the volunteer
group “Monarchs” for trail maintenance.
• Explore opportunities to connect existing
trails and walkways.
• Implement a pilot program to determine
interest in group walks and nature hikes
programming.
• Consider wayfinding and land
conservation program for the City’s trail
system.

Community Voice:
• Desires for walking paths or trails were
recorded in the stakeholder interviews,
workshop 1, workshop 3, the multimodal
survey, and the feedback comments.
• Community desires included: “walking
paths”, “bike/walking paths”, “walking
trails”, and “walking”.
• Exhibit 4.1-13 illustrates the location of
the respondents that indicated a desire
for walking paths or trails.

Goal 4.2: “Walking Paths or Trails”
Enhance park access and promote
healthy living through a well defined trail
system.

Copyright © 1995–2024 Esri.

All rights reserved.

Exhibit 4.1-13:

Walking Paths or Trails Survey Results
Multimodal Survey
Feedback Survey
Workshop #1
Workshop #3
City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan | 88
Existing Conditions:

Recommendations:
• Burbank has developed a
comprehensive bicycle network,
including various types of bikeways
and parking facilities, to make cycling
more appealing. In 2020, the City
adopted a Complete Streets Plan
outlining policies for transportation and
mobility strategies.
• The Chandler Bikeway runs along
Chandler Boulevard, stretching
approximately 2.8 miles from Mariposa
Street to the city’s border near North
Hollywood.
• Burbank Channel Bikeway is a three-
quarter mile bicycle and pedestrian
path that runs along the Burbank
Western Flood Control Channel.
• Enhance communications in trail
availability, accessibility, and feedback
from the community.
• Continue implementation of the
Burbank Complete Streets Plan: Goal 5
Bicycle and Pedestrian Mobility.

Community Voice:
• Desires for bike trails were recorded in
the stakeholder interviews, workshop 3,
and the feedback comments.
• Community desires included: “bike
trails”, “protected bike lanes”, “bike
paths”, “biking accessibility”, and
“more bike friendly”.
• Exhibit 4.1-14 illustrates the location of
the respondents that indicated a desire
for bike trails.

Goal 4.3: “Bike Trails”
Improve communication on trail access,
gather community feedback, and
advance the Burbank Complete Streets
Plan to boost bike and pedestrian mobility.

Copyright © 1995–2024 Esri.

All rights reserved.

Exhibit 4.1-14:

Bike Trails Survey Results
Feedback Survey
Workshop #3
Key Strategy #4: Create interconnected
greenways with walking loops that link parks and trails to accessible transit options and parking, promoting
sustainable mobility and outdoor recreation.
89 | City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan
4 Existing Conditions:

Recommendations:
• The automobile centric nature of
southern California has enhanced
our community’s ability to travel to
parks throughout the city. According
to the local trends outlined in section

3.5, Burbank parks have a significant
sphere of influence. Park visitors come
from up to two (2) miles outside the City
limits to visit a park. Parking as been
and will continue to be a key resource
in visiting local parks.
• Implement traffic calming measures
adjacent to parks and areas of
pedestrian confluence.
• Implement design guidelines to allow
pedestrian flow from parking areas
into parks avoiding having to cross
vehicular routes or additional parking
areas.
• Strengthen buffers between pedestrian
areas and parking zones along park
frontage.
• Provide adequate parking and
alternative transportation options for
parks and large events.

Community Voice:
• Desires for parking and transportation
were recorded in the staff focus
group, workshop 1, and the feedback
comments.
• Community desires included: “traffic”,
“traffic issues”, “pedestrian safety”, and
“parking”.
• Exhibit 4.1-15 illustrates the location of
the respondents that indicated a desire
for parking and transportation.

Goal 4.4: “Parking and Transportation”
Enhance pedestrian safety by adding
traffic calming, improving parking flow,
and ensuring adequate parking and
alternative transport for parks and events.

Copyright © 1995–2024 Esri.

All rights reserved.

Exhibit 4.1-15: Parking and
Transportation Survey Results
Feedback Survey
Workshop #1
City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan | 90
Key Strategy #5: Create a versatile cultural
hub that offers adaptable spaces for performances,
exhibitions, and community-driven programs, fostering
creative expression and cultural engagement.

Existing Conditions:

Recommendations:
• Burbank is home to a vibrant
performing arts scene. The City offers
a range of performance venues that
serve the community, such as the
Starlight Bowl, a popular outdoor
amphitheater known for summer
concerts and events. Indoor venues
like the Colony Theatre provide
intimate settings for live theater and
cultural performances, making them
central to the city’s growing arts scene.
• Develop collaborative partnerships
with local nonprofit groups to promote
venue and cultural arts programming
opportunities.
• Continue improvements of the Burbank
Little Theater and the Starlight Bowl to
offer various scale events and platforms
for arts and cultural productions.

Community Voice:
• Desires for a performance venue were
recorded in the stakeholder interviews,
staff focus group, and the feedback
comments.
• Community desires included: “theater”,
“performance shell”, “venue”,
“Burbank Little Theatre”, “creative arts
center”, and “Starlight Bowl”.
• Exhibit 4.1-16 illustrates the location of
the respondents that indicated a desire
for performance venue.

Goal 5.1: “Performance Venue”
Strengthen partnerships with local
nonprofits and enhance facilities like the
Burbank Little Theater and Starlight Bowl,
providing diverse platforms for arts and
cultural events.

Copyright © 1995–2024 Esri.

All rights reserved.

Exhibit 4.1-16:

Performance Venue Survey Results
Feedback Survey
91 | City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan
4 Existing Conditions:

Recommendations:
• Burbank offers a variety of arts and
culture programs, including art gallery
shows, the Annual Youth Art Expo, and
the Holiday Arts & Crafts Boutique.

The City also provides workshops in
pottery, painting, jewelry making, and
more, fostering creativity and cultural
engagement for all ages.
• Attendance increased from 2020 to
2023 by 1,775 in its arts and crafts
activities.
• Continue improvements of the Burbank
Little Theater and the Starlight Bowl to
offer various scale events and platforms
for art and cultural productions.
• As development and park
enhancements take place the
City should look at providing more
opportunities for public art installations
or rotating exhibits.
• Consider expanding access to diverse
artistic classes, increasing the number
of community-wide cultural events, and
fostering partnerships with local artists
and cultural organizations to enhance
program offerings.

Community Voice:
• Desires for arts and culture programs
were recorded in the stakeholder
interviews, staff focus group, workshop
2, workshop 3, the multimodal survey,
and the feedback comments.
• Community desires included: “arts and
entertainment”, “music class”, “art
class”, “cultural events”, “prioritize the
arts”, and “concerts at Starlight Bowl”.
• Exhibit 4.1-17 illustrates the location of
the respondents that indicated a desire
for arts and culture programs.

Goal 5.2: “Arts and Culture Programs”
Expand access to the arts through
fostering expanded cultural programs
and development of facilities / venue
optimization.

Copyright © 1995–2024 Esri.

All rights reserved.

Exhibit 4.1-17: Arts and Culture
Programs Survey Results
Multimodal Survey
Feedback Survey
Workshop #2
Workshop #3
City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan | 92
Key Strategy #6: Expand diverse programming
that provides tailored activities for both seniors and youth, encouraging active engagement and community growth.

Existing Conditions:

Recommendations:
• The City offers programs and activities
at the Joslyn and Tuttle Adult Centers
including fitness and recreation
programs, social and recreational
activities, nutrition services, educational
and cultural programs, special events,
and travel opportunities.
• Create more Senior Clubs, Social Clubs,
and Travel Clubs to foster community
and reduce isolation among seniors.
• Expand fitness offerings such as Tai
Chi, aquatic cardio fit, and yoga
to accommodate varying levels of
mobility and health conditions for
seniors.
• Offer additional arts and crafts classes,
music sessions, and dance programs
specifically tailored for seniors, helping
to stimulate creativity and improve
cognitive health.

Community Voice:
• Desires for senior programs and
activities were recorded in the staff
focus group, workshop 1, and the
multimodal survey.
• Community desires included: “senior
programs”, and “senior activities”.
• Exhibit 4.1-18 illustrates the location of
the respondents that indicated a desire
for senior programs and activities.

Goal 6.1: “More Senior Programs and
Activities”
Foster community and well-being by
expanding social clubs, fitness options,
and creative arts programs for seniors.

Copyright © 1995–2024 Esri.

All rights reserved.

Exhibit 4.1-18: More Senior Programs
and Activities Survey Results
Multimodal Survey
Workshop #1
93 | City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan
4 Existing Conditions:

Recommendations:
• The City of Burbank offers a variety of
day camps including sports camps,
art experiences, and nature-focused
activities. Specialty camps such as
Chess Wizards, Short Film, and Roller
Derby provide unique opportunities
for children to explore their interests.

Additionally, creative options
like Crayola Camps and nature
experiences ensure a well-rounded
selection for young participants during
school breaks.
• Attendance increased from 2020 to
2023 by more than 4,250 in youth
camps.
• Evaluate program offerings to provide
accessible camps for working parents,
including both full-day and half-day
options, to accommodate different
schedules and needs.
• Explore partnerships with local schools
to offer after school programs or camps
on school campuses, particularly for
children who attend summer school.
• Consider offering a variety of half-day
specialty camps (e.g., sports, science,
and dance camps) in the morning and
afternoon to allow flexibility for parents
and more program options for children.

Community Voice:
• Desires for day camp activities were
recorded in the stakeholder interviews,
staff focus group, workshop 1, and
workshop 2.
• Community desires included:
“childcare” and “camps”.
• Exhibit 4.1-19 illustrates the location of
the respondents that indicated a desire
for day camps.

Goal 6.2: “Day Camp”
Provide flexible day camps with options
for working parents through full-day, half-
day, and school-partnered camps.

Copyright © 1995–2024 Esri.

All rights reserved.

Exhibit 4.1-19:

Day Camp Survey Results
Workshop #1
Workshop #2
City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan | 94
Park and Recreation Facility Funding Recommendations
The cornerstone of the success of the City Parks Master Plan is the City’s ability to secure adequate and stable funding for the development and operation of parks, recreation facilities, and programs. Two major cost centers require funding to implement the Master Plan. One is capital costs which includes potential acquisition and development of new required parkland and facilities and renovation of existing parks. The second major cost center is to develop long-term sustainable resources for operations and maintenance of existing and new facilities.

This section of the Master Plan provides recommendations for park development, maintenance, and operations to assist Burbank in preparing for planned implementation.

A number of financial resources are available, and the City must be strategic as it considers initial costs for new park development and the ongoing financial needs associated with the ongoing maintenance, and operations of the parks, programs, and any new services for the community. Meeting these challenges will require equal amounts of vision, resourcefulness, partnership, and hard work.

The specific funding source for projects will depend on the timing of the new development, the funding sources available at that time, and/or those which may be more easily pursued when the project is anticipated to move forward. For major improvements, which include such facilities as community buildings and sports facilities, a capital project fund-raising effort may be required.

Sponsorships and/or naming rights for major corporate or other private donors may also be a consideration. In some cases, the use of a professional fundraising firm should be considered once a facility or project is identified. Other sources of funding may include development agreements, public/private partnerships, and/or grant opportunities.

4.2 SECTION FOUR: RECOMMENDATIONS
The City of Burbank
Photo by the City of Burbank
95 | City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan
4 Use of bonds, an increase in taxes, or
special assessment districts requires voter-
approval. Despite the dislike for taxes,
voters in many communities have been
willing to accept an increase when
revenues are specifically earmarked for
improvements or enhancements to public
parks and amenities. Additional information
on possible funding sources available are
provided in the appendix. The City should
review and evaluate all available grant
opportunities for each of the new projects
considered.

Some possible funding sources include:
• Community Development Block Grants (CDBG)
• Office of Grants and Local Services (OGALS)
◦ California Land Water and Conservation Fund (LWCF)
◦ Per Capita Grants
◦ Recreation Trails Program
◦ Outdoor Equity Grants
• MLB-MLBPA Baseball Tomorrow Fund
• United States Tennis Association (USTA) Facility Services Program • Trails, Greenways, and Bicycle Transportation
• U.S.A. Swimming Foundation Grants
Exhibit 4.2-1 on the following pages, identifies recommended projects by park site and recreation facility for the City of Burbank based on the community outreach and professional opinion developed during the Master Plan process.

Recreation facilities and parks that have no improvements listed are NOT excluded from the overall master plan recommendations such as restroom maintenance improvements, trails, and amenity lifecycle replacement analysis as well as programming improvements.

Project cost estimates are general in nature and developed to represent a master plan level cost for future budgeting. Costs should be considered as approximations of the proposed project. Actual costs will depend on design, size of facility, additional support facilities, utilities, infrastructure, environmental conditions as well as site specific conditions, which require additional study and have not been evaluated in the Master Plan. Based on these general project estimates and with all projects considered, the City of Burbank has a projection of $200,224,405 in park and facility specific renovations.

The total estimated project cost identified in the FY24-25 CIP is $45,545,744. There is an additional $154,678,661 in master plan specific recommendations.

Youth Water Polo
Photo by the City of Burbank
City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan | 96
*

PARK / FACILITY AND RECOMMENDATIONS ADOPTED
CIP FY 2024-25

MASTER PLAN

ESTIMATED
COSTS

CITY FACILITIES
Betsy Lueke Creative Arts Center at George Izay Park
• Improvements identified in George Izay Park Master Plan

Burbank Animal Shelter
• Flooring Replacement (CIP project no. 24565) $177,987 Burbank Little Theater at George Izay Park
• Improvements identified in George Izay Park Master Plan Burbank Tennis Center at McCambridge Park
• No improvements
Chandler / Pass Community Garden
• No improvements
Colony Theater (Burbank Center Stage)
• No improvements

DeBell Golf Course
• Irrigation Replacement (CIP project no. 23859)
• Golf Improvements (CIP project no. 24561)
$3,075,786
$2,168,950

Joslyn Adult Center at George Izay Park
• Minor interior and exterior renovations $1,500,000
L.A. Kings Sports Center at Ralph Foy Park
• No improvements

Mary Alvord Recreation Center at Verdugo Park
• No improvements
McCambridge Pool at McCambridge Park
• Pool Improvements (CIP project no. 24979) $18,000,000 McCambridge Recreation Center at McCambridge Park
• Redesign and improvements of central kitchen (2,000 SF @ $950/SF) $1,900,000
Olive Recreation Center at George Izay Park
• Improvements identified in George Izay Park Master Plan Ovrom Community Center at Robert Ovrom Park
• No improvements
Starlight Bowl at Stough Canyon Park
• Starlight Bowl Amphitheater Transformation* (CIP project no. 24980)
• Starlight Bowl Amphitheater design and construction
$425,000
$88,181,552
Stough Canyon Nature Center
• No improvements
Tuttle Adult Center at Ralph Foy Park
• No improvements
Exhibit 4.2-1:

Parks and Recreation Facility Projects
SECTION FOUR: RECOMMENDATIONS
* community outreach, updated traffic management study
utilizing the new renderings, determining a management
model for future use, and addressing any civil engineering needs.
97 | City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan
4 Exhibit 4.2-1: Parks and Recreation
Facility Projects (Cont.)

PARK / FACILITY AND RECOMMENDATIONS ADOPTED
CIP FY 2024-25

MASTER PLAN

ESTIMATED
COSTS
Verdugo Aquatic Facility at Verdugo Park
• No improvements

POCKET PARKS
Compass Tree Park - 0.25 Acres
• Landscape improvements (800 SF @ $8/SF) $6,400
Earthwalk Park - 0.53 Acres
• Turf renovations (2,000 SF @ $3/SF) $6,000
Maple Street Playground - 0.40 Acres
• Turf renovations (5,000 SF @ $3/SF)
• Playground Replacement (CIP project no. 24977)
• Landscape improvements (500 SF @ $8/SF)
$460,000
$15,000
$4,000
Santa Anita Playlot - 0.34 Acres
• Playground Replacement (CIP project no. 24903) $639,983 Five Points Art Monument - 0.50 Acres
• Turf renovations (2,000 SF @ $3/SF) $6,000

NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS
Abraham Lincoln Park - 2.50 Acres
• Decomposed granite maintenance / abatement
• Landscape improvements (1000 SF @ $8/SF)
$5,000
$8,000
Bel Aire Ball Field - 1.75
• Parking improvements (10,000 SF @ $18/SF - AC and
grading = 22 stalls)
• Turf outfield renovation (21,000 SF @ $3/SF)
$180,000
$63,000
Larry L. Maxam Memorial Park - 5.29
• Turf renovations (60,000 SF @ $3/SF)
• Walkway renovations (allowance for 400’ x 5’ wide @
$16/ SF)
• Park walking loop (1000’ x 5’ wide @ $16/SF)
• Irrigation Replacement (CIP project no. 24815) $1,293,750 $180,000
$32,000
$80,000
Miller School Park (aka Joaquin Miller Park) - 1.60 Acres • Basketball court resurfacing (10,000 SF @ $4/SF)
• Court striping and surfacing (26,000 SF @ $4/SF)
• Turf renovations (20,000 SF @ $3/SF)
$40,000
$104,000
$60,000
Mountain View Park - 2.48 Acres
• Turf renovations (10,000 SF @ $3/SF)
• Remove horseshoe pits (complete, cap utilities)
$30,000
$10,000
Palm Ball Field - 1.50 Acres
• Turf outfield renovation (30,000 SF @ $3/SF)
• Walkway renovations (allowance for 500’ x 5’ wide @
$16/ SF)
$90,000
$40,000
City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan | 98
SECTION FOUR: RECOMMENDATIONS

PARK / FACILITY AND RECOMMENDATIONS ADOPTED
CIP FY 2024-25

MASTER PLAN

ESTIMATED
COSTS
Robert E. Gross Park - 4.85 Acres
• AC resurfacing in parking lot (21,000 SF @ $4/SF)
• Turf renovations (20,000 SF @ $3/SF)
• Park walking loop (1300’ x 5’ wide @ $16/SF)
• Landscape improvements (3,000 SF @ $8/SF)
$84,000
$60,000
$104,000
$24,000
Robert E. Lundigan Park - 1.32 Acres
• Turf renovations (20,000 SF @ $3/SF)
• Shade structure over swings (prefabricated 20’x 24’)
$60,000
$50,000
Robert R. Ovrom Park - 1.40 Acres
• Walkway renovations (allowance for 20’ x 5’ wide @
$16/SF) $1,600
Valley Park - 4.44 Acres
• Turf renovations (65,000 SF @ $3/SF)
• Valley Ballfield and Skate Park Shade Structures
(CIP project no. 24818) $202,400
$195,000
Vickroy Park - 1.40 Acres
• Turf renovations (65,000 SF @ $3/SF)
• Remove horseshoe pits (complete, cap utilities)
$195,000
$10,000
Whitnall Highway Park North - 4.50 Acres
• Park walking loop (allowance for 1500’ x 5’ wide @
$16/SF) $120,000
Whitnall Highway Park South - 4.40 Acres
• Turf renovations (30,000 SF @ $3/SF)
• Decomposed granite maintenance and abatement
$90,000
$15,000

COMMUNITY PARKS
Brace Canyon Park - 20.05 Acres
• Ballfield to synthetic turf (CIP project no. 23441)
• Playground Replacement (CIP project no. 24978)
• Turf renovations (50,000 SF @ $3/SF)
• Landscape renovations (15,000 SF @ $8/SF)
• Walkway renovations (allowance for 100’ x 5’ wide @
$16/SF)
• AC resurfacing in parking lot (30,000 SF @ $4/SF)
$5,159,262
$1,063,750
$150,000
$120,000
$8,000
$120,000
George Izay Park - 15.36 Acres
• George Izay Master Plan (CIP project no. 23468)
• New Community Center and Little Theater
• Irrigation Replacement (CIP project no. 23858)
• Ballfield Shade Structure (CIP project no. 24976)
$1,328,850
$1,419,793
$418,600
$56,065,829**
Johnny Carson Park - 17.62 Acres
• Shade Structure (CIP project no. 24819)
• Decomposed granite trail renovations (3,000 LF x 15’ = 45,000 SF @ $8/SF)
• Turf renovations (100,000 SF @ $2/SF)
$460,000
$360,000
$200,000
Exhibit 4.2-1: Parks and Recreation
Facility Projects (Cont.)
**from cost estimate in the approved 2022 George
Izay Park Master Plan report.
99 | City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan
4 PARK / FACILITY AND RECOMMENDATIONS ADOPTED
CIP FY 2024-25

MASTER PLAN

ESTIMATED
COSTS
McCambridge Park - 17.80 Acres
• Irrigation Replacement (CIP project no. 24559)
• Playground Replacement (CIP project no. 24816)
• Landscape renovations (5,000 SF @ $8/SF)
• Turf renovations (110,000 SF @ $3/SF)
• AC resurfacing in parking lot (15,000 SF @ $4/SF)
$1,768,000
$1,959,600
$40,000
$330,000
$60,000
Ralph Foy Park - 10.00 Acres
• AC resurfacing in parking lot (20,000 SF @ $4/SF)
• Turf renovations (110,000 SF @ $3/SF)
• Turf outfield renovation (30,000 SF @ $3/SF)
• Add shade structures to bleachers and dug outs
• Park Lighting Improvements (CIP project no. 24825)
• Irrigation Replacement (CIP project no. 24814)
• Schafer Ballfield Lighting (CIP project no. 24813)
$356,500
$1,408,750
$476,100
$80,000
$330,000
$90,000
$150,000
Verdugo Park - 8.00 Acres
• Landscape renovations (stump removal, DG infill)
• Turf renovations (50,000 SF @ $3/SF )
• Park walking loop (500’ x 5’ wide @ $16/SF)
• Basketball Backboards Replacement
(CIP project no. 24215) $223,400
$10,000
$150,000
$40,000

REGIONAL PARKS
Stough Canyon Park - 103.57 Acres
• New Starlight Bowl amphitheater improvements (see
under facility improvements)
Wildwood Canyon Park - 500.00 Acres
• No improvements

FUTURE PARKS AND FACILITIES
Dick Clark Dog Park (CIP project no. 24253) $2,534,283
Hollywood/Way Community Garden (CIP project no. 19540) $125,000

UNIDENTIFIED SITE-SPECIFIC PARK IMPROVEMENTS
• Burbank Chanel Bikeway Public Art (CIP project no.
24558)
• Park signage / monumentation ($70,000 EA)
• Picnic table standards ($2,530 EA)
• Trash receptacle standards ($1,200 EA)
• Hot coal receptacle standards ($1,200 EA)
$400,000
$1,890,000
$546,480
$259,200
$129,600
MASTER PLAN SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS TOTAL $154,678,661 PARKS & RECREATION ADOPTED CIP FY 2024-25 TOTAL
(INCLUDING PRIOR YEAR APPROP.) $45,545,744
PARKS & RECREATION PRIOR YEAR APPROP. FROM CIP FY 2024-25 [$19,568,024] Exhibit 4.2-1: Parks and Recreation
Facility Projects (Cont.)
City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan | 100
Short, Mid, and Long-Term Costs
The following section was developed to outline future Capital Improvement Projects (CIP) efforts. The following time frame may change due to budget considerations and community priorities. Exhibit 4.3-1 illustrates the short-term (FY 2024-2029), mid-term (FY 2029-2034), and long term (FY 2034-2039) park and recreation facility recommendations from this City Parks Master Plan.

4.3 Exhibit 4.3-1: Short, Mid, and
Long-Term Costs
SECTION FOUR: RECOMMENDATIONS

PARK / FACILITY AND RECOMMENDATIONS FY
2024-2029
FY
2029-2034
FY
2034- 2039
Betsy Lueke Creative Arts Center at George Izay
Park
• Improvements identified in George Izay Park
Master Plan

Burbank Animal Shelter
• No improvements
Burbank Little Theater at George Izay Park
• Improvements identified in George Izay Park
Master Plan
Burbank Tennis Center at McCambridge Park
• No improvements
Chandler / Pass Community Garden
• No improvements
Colony Theater (Burbank Center Stage)
• No improvements

DeBell Golf Course
• Golf Improvements (CIP project no. 24561) $1,006,250

Joslyn Adult Center at George Izay Park
• Minor interior and exterior renovations $1,500,000
L.A. Kings Sports Center at Ralph Foy Park
• No improvements

Mary Alvord Recreation Center at Verdugo Park
• No improvements
McCambridge Pool at McCambridge Park
• Pool Improvements (CIP project no. 24979) $16,500,000 McCambridge Recreation Center at McCambridge
Park
• Redesign and improvements of central
kitchen (2,000 SF @ $950/SF) $1,900,000
Olive Recreation Center at George Izay Park
• Improvements identified in George Izay Park
Master Plan
Ovrom Community Center at Robert Ovrom Park
• No improvements
Starlight Bowl at Stough Canyon Park
• Starlight Bowl Transformation (CIP project no.
24980) $425,000 $88,181,552
101 | City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan
4 Exhibit 4.3-1: Short, Mid, and
Long-Term Costs (cont.)

PARK / FACILITY AND RECOMMENDATIONS FY
2024-2029
FY
2029-2034
FY
2034- 2039
Stough Canyon Nature Center
• No improvements
Tuttle Adult Center at Ralph Foy Park
• No improvements
Verdugo Aquatic Facility at Verdugo Park
• No improvements
Compass Tree Park - 0.25 Acres
• Landscape improvements (800 SF @ $8/SF) $6,400
Earthwalk Park - 0.53 Acres
• Turf renovations (2,000 SF @ $3/SF) $6,000
Maple Street Playground - 0.40 Acres
• Turf renovations (5,000 SF @ $3/SF)
• New Playground (CIP project no. 24977)
• Landscape improvements (500 SF @ $8/SF)
$15,000
$460,000
$4,000
Santa Anita Playlot - 0.34 Acres
• No improvements
Five Points Art Monument - 0.50 Acres
• Turf renovations (2,000 SF @ $3/SF) $6,000
First Street Pocket Park
• First Street Pocket Park (CIP project no.
24994) $400,000
Abraham Lincoln Park - 2.50 Acres
• Decomposed granite maintenance /
abatement
• Landscape improvements (1000 SF @ $8/SF)
$5,000
$8,000
Bel Aire Ball Field - 1.75
• Parking improvements (10,000 SF @ $18/SF)
AC and grading = 22 stalls
• Turf outfield renovation (21,000 SF @ $3/SF)
$180,000
$63,000
Larry L. Maxam Memorial Park - 5.29
• Turf renovations (60,000 SF @ $3/SF )
• Walkway renovations (allowance for 400’ x
5’ wide @ $16/SF)
• Park walking loop (1000’ x 5’ wide @ $16/SF)
• Irrigation Replacement (CIP project no.
24815)
$180,000
$32,000
$80,000
$1,265,000
Miller School Park (aka Joaquin Miller Park) - 1.60
Acres
• Basketball court resurfacing (10,000 SF @ $4/
SF)
• Court striping and surfacing (26,000 SF @ $4/
SF)
• Turf renovations (20,000 SF @ $3/SF)
$40,000
$104,000
$60,000
Mountain View Park - 2.48 Acres
• Turf renovations (10,000 SF @ $3/SF)
• Remove horseshoe pits (complete, cap
utilities)
$30,000
$10,000
City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan | 102
SECTION FOUR: RECOMMENDATIONS

PARK / FACILITY AND RECOMMENDATIONS FY
2024-2029
FY
2029-2034
FY
2034- 2039
Palm Ball Field - 1.50 Acres
• Turf outfield renovation (30,000 SF @ $3/SF)
• Walkway renovations (allowance for 500’ x
5’ wide @ $16/SF)
$90,000
$40,000
Robert E. Gross Park - 4.85 Acres
• AC resurfacing in parking lot (21,000 SF @ $4/
SF)
• Turf renovations (20,000 SF @ $3/SF)
• Park walking loop (1300’ x 5’ wide @ $16/SF)
• Landscape improvements (3,000 SF @ $8/SF)
$84,000
$60,000
$104,000
$24,000
Robert E. Lundigan Park - 1.32 Acres
• Turf renovations (20,000 SF @ $3/SF)
• Shade structure over swings (prefab 20’ x
24’)
$60,000
$50,000
Robert R. Ovrom Park - 1.40 Acres
• Walkway renovations (allowance for 20’ x 5’
wide @ $16/SF) $1,600
Valley Park - 4.44 Acres
• Turf renovations (65,000 SF @ $3/SF)
• Valley Ballfield and Skate Park Shade
Structures (CIP project no. 24818)
$195,000
$94,000
Vickroy Park - 1.40 Acres
• Turf renovations (65,000 SF @ $3/SF)
• Remove horseshoe pits (complete, cap
utilities)
$195,000
$10,000
Whitnall Highway Park North - 4.50 Acres
• Park walking loop (1500’ x 5’ wide @ $16/SF) $120,000 Whitnall Highway Park South - 4.40 Acres
• Turf renovations (30,000 SF @ $3/SF)
• Decomposed granite maintenance /
abatement
$90,000
$15,000
Brace Canyon Park - 20.05 Acres
• Playground Renovation (CIP project no.
24978)
• Turf renovations (50,000 SF @ $3/SF)
• Landscape renovations (15,000 SF @ $8/SF)
• Walkway renovations (allowance for 100’ x
5’ wide @ $16/SF)
• AC resurfacing in parking lot (30,000 SF @ $4/
SF)
$1,063,750
$150,000
$120,000
$8,000
$120,000
George Izay Park - 15.36 Acres
• Implementation of the George Izay Master
Plan including new Community Center and
Little Theater (CIP project no. 23468)
• Ballfield Shade Structure (CIP project no.
24976)
$1,500,000
$418,600
$54,565,829
Johnny Carson Park - 17.62 Acres
• Decomposed granite trail renovations (3,000
LF x 15’ =45,000 SF @ $8/SF)
• Turf renovations (100,000 SF @ $2/SF)
$360,000
$200,000
Exhibit 4.3-1: Short, Mid, and
Long-Term Costs (cont.)
103 | City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan
4 PARK / FACILITY AND RECOMMENDATIONS FY
2024-2029
FY
2029-2034
FY
2034- 2039
McCambridge Park - 17.80 Acres
• Landscape renovations (5,000 SF @ $8/SF)
• Turf renovations (110,000 SF @ $3/SF)
• AC resurfacing in parking lot (15,000 SF @ $4/
SF)
• New Playground (CIP project no. 24816)
$40,000
$330,000
$60,000
$1,959,600
Ralph Foy Park - 10.00 Acres
• AC resurfacing in parking lot (20,000 SF @ $4
/SF)
• Turf renovations (110,000 SF @ $3/SF)
• Turf outfield renovation (30,000 SF @ $3/SF)
• Add shade structures to bleachers and dug
outs
• Park Lighting Improvements (CIP project no.
24825)
• Irrigation Replacement (CIP project no.
24814)
• Schafer Ballfield Lighting (CIP project no.
24813)
$80,000
$330,000
$90,000
$150,000
$356,500
$1,380,000
$178,250
Verdugo Park - 8.00 Acres
• Landscape renovations (stump removal, DG
infill)
• Turf renovations (50,000 SF @ $3/SF)
• Park walking loop (500’ x 5’ wide @ $16/SF)
• Basketball Backboards Replacement
(CIP project no. 24215)
$10,000
$150,000
$40,000
$172,500

REGIONAL PARKS
Stough Canyon Park - 103.57 Acres
• Improvements identified in the New Starlight
Bowl amphitheater improvements
Wildwood Canyon Park - 500.00 Acres
• No improvements

NEW PARKS AND RECREATION FACILITIES
Dick Clark Dog Park (CIP project no. 24253) $600,000
Hollywood/Way Community Garden
• No improvements

UNIDENTIFIED SITE-SPECIFIC PARK IMPROVEMENTS
Park signage / monumentation ($70,000 EA) $630,000 $630,000 $630,000 Picnic table standards ($2,530 EA) $182,160 $182,160 $182,160 Trash receptacle standards ($1,200 EA) $86,400 $86,400 $86,400 Hot coal receptacle standards ($1,200 EA) $43,200 $43,200 $43,200 TOTAL COSTS $34,599,210 $55,750,589 $90,623,312
Exhibit 4.3-1: Short, Mid, and
Long-Term Costs (cont.)
City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan | 104
Maintenance and Staffing Recommendations
The City of Burbank’s Parks and Recreation Department currently employs more than 193 full-time equivalents (FTEs) to manage a wide range of programs, services, and facilities, which also includes park maintenance, recreation services, and specialized roles such as lifeguards, tree trimmers, and animal control officers. This staffing level significantly exceeds the national median for cities of similar size, which typically have around 120 FTEs, with an upper quartile of 181 FTEs. Burbank also provides 18.12 FTEs per 10,000 residents, well above the National Recreation and Park Association’s (NRPA) average of 7.9 FTEs per 10,000 residents, reflecting the City’s commitment to maintaining high levels of service.

The City’s commitment to its parks, programs, and services is commendable. With this said, managing and keeping up with the park maintenance demand is more involved than the budget and presents new challenges each year for all agencies. The maintenance of the City’s 26 parks and facilities, its public pools, nature centers, and specialized venues like the animal shelter, BMX/skate park, and performing arts centers must be assessed throughout the year and the City must be strategic with its funding and the personnel dedicated to park maintenance with rising costs of materials, supplies, and labor up by more than 70% since FY 2019/20, presenting a significant challenge to sustaining these efforts.

4.4 SECTION FOUR: RECOMMENDATIONS
Tree Trimming
Photo by the City of Burbank
105 | City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan
4 While Burbank’s commitment to staffing
and its budget for Parks and Recreation
are impressive when compared to similar
sized cities, there may be opportunities
to optimize and reexamine the personnel
and the distribution of positions within
the Department, particularly in park
maintenance and recreation services.

Seasonal events, special programs, and
specific maintenance tasks could benefit
from an allocation of part-time and/or
contract staff, or volunteers to reduce
the workload on full-time employees.

Furthermore, the city’s high per capita
spending on park operations suggests
that cost recovery strategies should be
explored, particularly for programs that provide individual benefits such as golf courses or private swim lessons. Aligning fee structures with neighboring cities, while ensuring affordability, could help reduce reliance on the General Fund.

To address the high costs of park maintenance, Burbank should consider sustainable solutions, such as incorporating native plants into landscaping to reduce water and upkeep requirements. Community-driven volunteer programs could also play a role in alleviating maintenance pressures. Additionally, investing in low-maintenance infrastructure and equipment could further reduce long-term expenses. Expanding partnerships with local organizations, including the YMCA, Boys and Girls Clubs, and the Burbank Unified School District, could help share resources and responsibilities for park programming and maintenance, thus lightening the City’s financial load.

Looking ahead, Burbank should explore long-term funding solutions, including applying for grants such as the Land and Water Conservation Fund and Community Development Block Grants. The creation or expansion of assessment districts could also provide steady financial support for park operations and development. By pursuing these strategies, the City can ensure that its parks and recreation services remain both accessible and financially sustainable for the community.

Burbank Landscape and Forestry Department
Photo by the City of Burbank
City of Burbank • City Parks Master Plan | 106
Photo by https://www.visitcalifornia.com/
places-to-visit/burbank/